From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <segher@kernel.crashing.org>
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 390C8DDE46
	for <linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org>; Wed, 10 Jan 2007 09:16:47 +1100 (EST)
In-Reply-To: <1168380289.22458.313.camel@localhost.localdomain>
References: <OF7EF2F643.75F7008B-ON8625725D.00157658-8625725D.00167CB4@au1.ibm.com>
	<1168236558.22458.187.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<8ee3d13b73a511a785ac4744c268943e@kernel.crashing.org>
	<1168288352.22458.198.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<5f992368c65d3d53003b0e9f2955ae79@kernel.crashing.org>
	<1168296460.22458.232.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<27d6554d600437ed39853784c0cf96fd@kernel.crashing.org>
	<1168302607.22458.242.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<9a44c3bbc4ab67921f784f16991889bd@kernel.crashing.org>
	<1168379157.22458.307.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<e4d627ebdd8e678a0441bc0649714de8@kernel.crashing.org>
	<1168380289.22458.313.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v623)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Message-Id: <c191ad29e827e1e26464cde281f88ef5@kernel.crashing.org>
From: Segher Boessenkool <segher@kernel.crashing.org>
Subject: Re: EMAC OF binding....
Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2007 23:17:07 +0100
To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@au1.ibm.com>
Cc: Christian Rund <Christian.Rund@de.ibm.com>,
	Hartmut Penner <HPENNER@de.ibm.com>, Murali N Iyer <mniyer@us.ibm.com>,
	linuxppc-dev list <linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org>
List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List <linuxppc-dev.ozlabs.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev>,
	<mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@ozlabs.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-dev>
List-Post: <mailto:linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org>
List-Help: <mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@ozlabs.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev>,
	<mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@ozlabs.org?subject=subscribe>

> I don't see the need of having some weird "soc" node that doesn't quite
> mean anything (especially on axon) that has phandles to every sub 
> device
> in there :-)

Well simply, if I understood you correctly, you have some
register where some bits control emac #0 and some control
emac #1.  This register can't belong to either of those
devices because it can't belong to both, so it has to
belong to some "control" / "power management" / whatever
device.

> On those ASICs, every device almost needs to know what is it's "cell
> index" because of little details here or there.

Yes.

> I really see that as an
> attribute of the device and thus should be a property of the node.

You still need to describe that register somewhere in the
device tree.


Segher