[PATCH] Add StorCenter DTS first draft.

[Kumar Gala]

On Jul 18, 2007, at 11:19 AM, Segher Boessenkool wrote:

>>>> +	compatible = "storcenter";
>>>
>>> Needs a manufacturer name in there.
>>
>> Right.  Will use:
>> 	compatible = "iomega,storcenter"
>
> Okido.
>
>>>> +		PowerPC,603e {			/* Really 8241 */
>>>
>>> So say "PowerPC,8241 at 0", or "PowerPC,e300 at 0" (or whatever
>>> the CPU core in there is), or simply "cpu at 0", following
>>> the generic naming recommended practice.
>>
>> Well, its the 8241 SoC with a 603e core...  (This is
>> the same phrase currently being used on the Kurobox.)
>> I'll use:
>>
>> 	PowerPC,8241 at 0 }
>
> That might be best yes.
>
>>>> +	soc10x {
>>>
>>> Bad name.  Where is the binding for this?  I don't think
>>> I saw it before.
>>
>> It's what is being used, again, by the Kurobox.  I understand
>> that doesn't make it "right", just precedented by now.
>
> Sure, just trying to trick you into documenting it ;-)
>
>> How about "soc8241 at 80000000" instead?
>
> soc@ like suggested by Scott seems just fine.
>
>>>> +			compatible = "fsl-i2c";
>>>
>>> Needs to be more specific.
>>
>> Hmmm...  Not sure what to use here then.  There are many
>> existing examples using "fsl-i2c" already.  Granted, we've
>> established that they could be wrong...  Should this be
>> more like this?:
>>
>>     compatible = "fsl,mpc8241-i2c", "fsl-i2c";
>
> That looks good yes.  Or if the kernel side code for
> recognising fsl,mpc8241-i2c gets merged in time, you
> can leave out fsl-i2c from your device tree completely.

Hmm, there are really only two fsl,i2c controllers.  The one we call  
fsl-i2c, and the cpm-i2c controller.

So I'd prefer we don't use fsl,mpc8241-i2c.  I'd suggest fsl,ppc-i2c  
or something like that.

- k