From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 10:54:29 +1100 From: David Gibson To: Segher Boessenkool Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] Add local bus device nodes to MPC837xMDS device trees. Message-ID: <20080310235429.GC11559@localhost.localdomain> References: <1204800155-11613-1-git-send-email-leoli@freescale.com> <20080307002730.GB24142@localhost.localdomain> <9f7d0248e911f6fa1a2d4292c96ef72e@kernel.crashing.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <9f7d0248e911f6fa1a2d4292c96ef72e@kernel.crashing.org> Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, Li Yang , paulus@samba.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Fri, Mar 07, 2008 at 04:39:30AM +0100, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > > This isn't a problem with this device tree, but it's probably time we > > started establishing some conventional generic names for nand flash > > and board-control devices. > > > > So, to start the ball rolling, I've seen several names for nand flash > > nodes, I'd suggest we standardise on "nand-flash". > > What's wrong with the already well-established generic name "flash"? I was concerned that using "flash" for both NOR flash (which it already is) and NAND flash might be unwise. I am quite open to being convinced otherwise, though. > > I've seen several variants for board control devices (cpld, bcsr, > > fpga, etc.) I suggest we standardise on "board-control" > > Fine with me, but it's very vague (hard to avoid though). Yes. -- David Gibson | I'll have my music baroque, and my code david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au | minimalist, thank you. NOT _the_ _other_ | _way_ _around_! http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson