[PATCH 23/29] ARM: orion5x: use DT to describe NOR on edmini_v2

[sebastian.hesselbarth@gmail.com (Sebastian Hesselbarth)]

On 04/14/2014 01:24 PM, Thomas Petazzoni wrote:
> Dear Sebastian Hesselbarth,
>
> On Mon, 14 Apr 2014 13:14:56 +0200, Sebastian Hesselbarth wrote:
>
>>> +		devbus-bootcs {
>>
>> Node label reference?
>>
>>> +			status = "okay";
>>> +
>>> +			/* Read parameters */
>>> +			devbus,bus-width    = <8>;
>>> +			devbus,turn-off-ps  = <90000>;
>>> +			devbus,badr-skew-ps = <0>;
>>> +			devbus,acc-first-ps = <186000>;
>>> +			devbus,acc-next-ps  = <186000>;
>>> +
>>> +			/* Write parameters */
>>> +			devbus,wr-high-ps  = <90000>;
>>> +			devbus,wr-low-ps   = <90000>;
>>> +			devbus,ale-wr-ps   = <90000>;
>>> +
>>> +			/*
>>> +			 * Currently the MTD code does not recognize
>>> +			 * the MX29LV400CBCT as a bottom-type
>>> +			 * device. This could cause risks of
>>> +			 * accidentally erasing critical flash
>>> +			 * sectors. We thus define a single,
>>> +			 * write-protected partition covering the
>>> +			 * whole flash.  TODO: once the flash part
>>> +			 * TOP/BOTTOM detection issue is sorted out in
>>> +			 * the MTD code, break this into at least
>>> +			 * three partitions: 'u-boot code', 'u-boot
>>> +			 * environment' and 'whatever is left'.
>>> +			 */
>>> +			nor at 0 {
>>
>> ePAPR suggests a generic node name. I talked to Olof on IRC, he prefers
>> generic names all over. I confirmed that this means "flash" node name
>> for both the controller _and_ the device.
>
> While I'm fine with changing the nor at 0 node name to flash at 0, I'm
> clearly not ok with changing devbus-bootcs to something that refers to
> a "flash", because the Device Bus controller is not only a flash
> controller. It can be used for many other memory mapped devices, such
> as FPGAs and so on.

No, I didn't mean to rename devbus-foo nodes, just the flash.

devbus-foo was the reason I pointed out that we have never been
very strict with node names.

Sebastian