From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: swarren@wwwdotorg.org (Stephen Warren) Date: Fri, 08 May 2015 15:04:26 -0600 Subject: [PATCH] ARM: tegra: add "nor-jedec" flash compatible binding In-Reply-To: References: <1431066098-19821-1-git-send-email-zajec5@gmail.com> <554CDD8C.7050000@wwwdotorg.org> <20150508184317.GZ32500@ld-irv-0074> Message-ID: <554D24DA.8060601@wwwdotorg.org> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 05/08/2015 02:57 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > On Fri, May 8, 2015 at 8:43 PM, Brian Norris > wrote: >> On Fri, May 08, 2015 at 10:00:12AM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote: >>> On 05/08/2015 12:21 AM, Rafa? Mi?ecki wrote: >>>> Starting with commits >>>> 8ff16cf ("Documentation: devicetree: m25p80: add "nor-jedec" binding") >>>> 1103b85 ("mtd: m25p80: bind to "nor-jedec" ID, for auto-detection") >>>> we have "nor-jedec" binding indicating support for JEDEC identification. >>> >>> The documentation looks quite incomplete. "nor-jedec" sounds like >>> it's intended to be something generic. As such, it should be >>> documented in e.g. >>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mtd/nor-jedec.txt, not buried in >>> one particular flash device's binding. If it's not intended to be >>> generic, why isn't the existing "winbond,w25q32dw" enough? >> >> It is generic, though there are plenty of additional manufacturer/device >> pairs that could go on top of it. m25p80 was (one of?) the first >> supported, so the naming has been based on legacy, and we're in the >> process of unwinding a bit of that. If it helps, we could move the doc >> to .../mtd/spi-nor,nor-jedec.txt or something like that. >> >>> Equally, "nor-jedec" doesn't sound like the right name. It doesn't >>> differentiate between SPI and parallel NOR flash, which presumably >>> need different compatible values, since the programming model is >>> quite different, and the compatible value is supposed to >>> define/imply the SW-visible programming model. >> >> It's definitely for SPI only. There was much discussion about this a >> few months back. Somewhere along the way, it was mentioned that the >> context (SPI slave is a child of SPI master) would make this clear. I'm >> still not sure why we didn't end up with something more descriptive, >> though, like "spi-nor,nor-jedec". > > What about "jedec,spi-nor"? That seems unique enough to me, or the options below if they're actually applicable. > Is this "SERIAL FLASH DISCOVERABLE PARAMETERS (SFDP)"? > https://www.jedec.org/standards-documents/docs/jesd216b > (Don't have time to register with jedec now...) > > If yes, "jedec,sfdp"? "jedec,jesd216b"?