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 ESMTP id E6753DDE27 for ; Thu, 22 Nov 2007 06:19:53 +1100 (EST) Message-Id: <8A7483CD-AF52-46C7-94FD-2CAE53740EC4@kernel.crashing.org> From: Kumar Gala To: Scott Wood In-Reply-To: <20071121173308.GB4413@loki.buserror.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v915) Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] [POWERPC] Add docs for Freescale DMA & DMA channel device tree nodes Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2007 13:19:43 -0600 References: <20071121173308.GB4413@loki.buserror.net> Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Nov 21, 2007, at 11:33 AM, Scott Wood wrote: > On Tue, Nov 20, 2007 at 11:14:40PM -0600, Kumar Gala wrote: >> + - compatible : compatible list, contains 2 entries, >> first is >> + "fsl,CHIP-dma", where CHIP is the processor >> + (mpc8540, mpc8540, etc.) and the second is >> + "fsl,eloplus-dma" > > So if the DMA register set gets tweaked again, will we have > eloplusplus? :-) > Maybe elo2 would be better. Seem unlikely for the forseeable future. > Do we really need completely separate descriptions of the two, or > can we just describe the difference in the compatible section? it seemed easier to duplicate and fix. - k