From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stephen Warren Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: tegra: add "nor-jedec" flash compatible binding Date: Fri, 08 May 2015 15:04:26 -0600 Message-ID: <554D24DA.8060601@wwwdotorg.org> References: <1431066098-19821-1-git-send-email-zajec5@gmail.com> <554CDD8C.7050000@wwwdotorg.org> <20150508184317.GZ32500@ld-irv-0074> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-spi-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Geert Uytterhoeven , Brian Norris Cc: =?UTF-8?B?UmFmYcWCIE1pxYJlY2tp?= , linux-tegra-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, Alexandre Courbot , Thierry Reding , MTD Maling List , "linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org" , "devicetree-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org" , Ezequiel Garcia , Marek Vasut , linux-spi , Linux-sh list List-Id: linux-tegra@vger.kernel.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=C5=82 Mi=C5=82ecki wrote: >>>> Starting with commits >>>> 8ff16cf ("Documentation: devicetree: m25p80: add "nor-jedec" bindi= ng") >>>> 1103b85 ("mtd: m25p80: bind to "nor-jedec" ID, for auto-detection"= ) >>>> we have "nor-jedec" binding indicating support for JEDEC identific= ation. >>> >>> 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/de= vice >> 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 d= oc >> 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 actuall= y=20 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"? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-spi" in the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html