[PATCH] devicetree/bindings: Add binding for micron n25q512a memory
scottwood at freescale.com
Tue Jul 8 07:25:54 EST 2014
On Thu, 2014-07-03 at 23:08 -0500, Jain Priyanka-B32167 wrote:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Wood Scott-B07421
> > Sent: Friday, July 04, 2014 3:40 AM
> > To: Jain Priyanka-B32167
> > Cc: devicetree at vger.kernel.org; linuxppc-dev at lists.ozlabs.org; linux-
> > spi at vger.kernel.org; linux-mtd at lists.infradead.org
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH] devicetree/bindings: Add binding for micron n25q512a
> > memory
> > On Thu, 2014-07-03 at 15:42 +0530, Priyanka Jain wrote:
> > > -Micron n25q512a memory is supported by m25p80 driver.
> > > Add compatible field required to support n25q512a in m25p80.txt -Add
> > > micron to the vendor-prefixes.txt file
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Priyanka Jain <Priyanka.Jain at freescale.com>
> > > ---
> > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mtd/m25p80.txt | 1 +
> > > .../devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.txt | 1 +
> > > 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> > Why did you send this to the ppc list but not the spi or mtd lists?
> [Jain Priyanka-B32167] Sorry, I missed that
> > I'm having a hard time following the flow of how these SPI devices get
> > bound -- is the compatible involved at all? I don't see this string
> > (with vendor prefix included) in the driver. I do see a table that
> > contains what looks like device IDs. If the device can report its id,
> > shouldn't we rely on that rather than device tree compatible?
> > -Scott
> [Jain Priyanka-B32167]
> Spi driver has a check to device name corresponding to device-id and compare to what is passed in dts string.
Please go into more detail. I don't see where the string
"micron,n25q512a" appears in the current kernel. I do see "n25q512a",
but how does that compare successfully with the version of the string
that has a vendor compatible?
Again, is there a device ID that can be read at runtime? Is there a
compatible string that represents a common programming interface?
> New checkpatch script search for exact string match in binding folder. So, I have added this in example.
That check has a lot of false positives when it comes to compatible
strings for specific chips that don't need to be specifically mentioned
in a more generic binding.
More information about the Linuxppc-dev