From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from co1outboundpool.messaging.microsoft.com (co1ehsobe004.messaging.microsoft.com [216.32.180.187]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "mail.global.frontbridge.com", Issuer "MSIT Machine Auth CA 2" (not verified)) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8A7A62C0110 for ; Thu, 19 Sep 2013 02:48:49 +1000 (EST) Message-ID: <1379522916.8901.0.camel@aoeu.buserror.net> Subject: Re: [PATCH] powerpc/mpc85xx:Add initial device tree support of T104x From: Scott Wood To: Kushwaha Prabhakar-B32579 Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2013 11:48:36 -0500 In-Reply-To: <071A08F2C6A57E4E94D980ECA553F874F8CA17@039-SN1MPN1-005.039d.mgd.msft.net> References: <1378882686-19454-1-git-send-email-prabhakar@freescale.com> <1378941854.12204.439.camel@snotra.buserror.net> <071A08F2C6A57E4E94D980ECA553F874F607C5@039-SN1MPN1-006.039d.mgd.msft.net> <1379366325.2536.178.camel@snotra.buserror.net> <071A08F2C6A57E4E94D980ECA553F874F8CA17@039-SN1MPN1-005.039d.mgd.msft.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: Wood Scott-B07421 , Aggrwal Poonam-B10812 , Jain Priyanka-B32167 , Sethi Varun-B16395 , "linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org" List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Mon, 2013-09-16 at 21:11 -0500, Kushwaha Prabhakar-B32579 wrote: > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Wood Scott-B07421 > > Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2013 2:49 AM > > To: Kushwaha Prabhakar-B32579 > > Cc: Wood Scott-B07421; linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org; > > galak@kernel.crashing.org; Aggrwal Poonam-B10812; Jain Priyanka-B32167; > > Sethi Varun-B16395 > > Subject: Re: [PATCH] powerpc/mpc85xx:Add initial device tree support of > > T104x > > > > On Fri, 2013-09-13 at 02:30 -0500, Kushwaha Prabhakar-B32579 wrote: > > > > I also question the need to define separate t1040 compatible values > > > > for all of these, if the only difference is whether the onboard > > > > switch is enabled or not. > > > > > > > > > > so should I use T104x as compatible field. and in T1040 device tree add > > extra node for l2 switch. > > I am using T1042 as base dts and T1040 includes T1040 + l2switch. > > so if I use T1042 in compatible. It will give wrong field for someone working on T1040QDS. What is wrong about it? It is compatible, right? -Scott