Re: [PATCH v2] Device tree bindings for Xilinx devices

["Grant Likely" <grant.likely@secretlab.ca>]

On 10/16/07, Stephen Neuendorffer <stephen.neuendorffer@xilinx.com> wrote:
>
> It occurs to me that the 'compatible' bindings should probably be the
> name of the preferred driver for the device.
>
> > +   l) Xilinx ML300 Framebuffer
> > +    - compatible : Must include "xilinx,ml300-fb"
> Should probably be 'xilinxfb', and probably shouldn't reference ML300 at
> all.

Actually, I don't think xilinx,ml300-fb is not specific enough (as
opposed to not general enough).  Given that the device tree is
supposed to describe the hardware as uniquely as possible, compatible
should probably contain a value like "xilinx,plb-tft-cntlr-ref-1.00.c"
(<vendor>,<ip core>,<version>).

A design with a modified fb core might specify:

        compatible = "acme,super-tft-1.3","xilinx,plb-tft-cntlr-ref-1.00.c";

Which indicates that it is a different part, but it provides the same
interface as the preexisting plb-tft-cntrl-ref ip core.  Similarly, a
newer reference design which uses a new version of the tft core should
specifiy:

        compatible =
"xilinx,plb-tft-cntrl-ref-1.00.d","xilinx,plb-tft-cntlr-ref-1.00.c";

That way the exact type of device is specified; but it is *compatible*
with the older device.  If the newer device has a greater feature set,
then a driver that can match against the leftmost compatible value can
make use of the extra features.

>
> > +   n) Xilinx EMAC and Xilinx TEMAC
> > +
> > +   Xilinx Ethernet devices.  Uses common properties from
> > other Ethernet
> > +   devices with the following constraints:
> > +
> > +   Required properties:
> > +    - compatible : Must include one of: "xilinx,plb-temac",
> > +                   "xilinx,plb-emac", "xilinx-opb-emac"
> Should probably be just 'emac' and 'temac'.

Actually; looking at the available ip cores; it should probably be:

"xilinx,opb-ethernet-1.02.a" for an emac driver
"xilinx,plb-temac-3.00.a" for a temac.

We should probably use the exact names of the ip core.  Less ambiguity that way.

Cheers,
g.

-- 
Grant Likely, B.Sc., P.Eng.
Secret Lab Technologies Ltd.
grant.likely@secretlab.ca
(403) 399-0195