From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gate.crashing.org (gate.crashing.org [63.228.1.57]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C1CBFDE02A for ; Fri, 21 Mar 2008 22:57:16 +1100 (EST) Subject: Re: [PATCH] [POWERPC] Add AMCC Glacier 460GT eval board dts From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt To: Segher Boessenkool In-Reply-To: <011f73a2a2f33e075c20f0d0bb42d4a7@kernel.crashing.org> References: <1205943310-26323-1-git-send-email-sr@denx.de> <1206090031.8420.67.camel@pasglop> <011f73a2a2f33e075c20f0d0bb42d4a7@kernel.crashing.org> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2008 22:51:42 +1100 Message-Id: <1206100302.8420.71.camel@pasglop> Mime-Version: 1.0 Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, Stefan Roese Reply-To: benh@kernel.crashing.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Fri, 2008-03-21 at 12:46 +0100, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > > As for the DTS, maybe a "compatible" property in the CPU might make > > some > > sense with a content along the lines of "ppc440x6" or whatever rev of > > the 440 core it is. > > Good idea, but please _also_ put the exact name in there, first; so > something like > > compatible = "AMCC,PowerPC,460GT", "AMCC,ppc440x6"; > > That way, you can still probe for specific versions where necessary. > This is completely in line with the "generic naming" recommended > practice; the PowerPC binding predates that RP, it really needs to > be updated. > > Any reason we keep the device_type here, btw? BTW, Should we sort compatible from the most specific to the most specific or the other way around ? Ben.