[PATCH] adding ROM chips to device tree: respin
Sergei Shtylyov
sshtylyov at ru.mvista.com
Wed Nov 8 08:52:19 EST 2006
Hello.
Vitaly Wool wrote:
>>>>>+ - memory_space : Offset and length of the register set for the device.
>>>>
>>>> NAK. There's no need to define an extra property where "reg" should be used.
>>
>>>The register set is actually not there and depends on flash chip type.
>>>So using regs here is misleading.
>>
>> This is an I/O resource on the parent bus and using the property other
>>than "reg" will be misleading. That's the way this spec has it -- "reg" is
>>used even for the PHY chip numbering on MDIO bus...
> So what? Lemme remind you that the actual registers *doesn't start* at
> the specified "start" so using regs is really a bad idea IMHO.
We don't have any actual registers (at least "physmap" doesn't know about
them anyway) I think, just a memory range. What registers are you talking about?
>>>>>+
>>>>>+ /*
>>>>>+ * We care only about physmap devices now as there's no
>>>>>+ * description defined for other ROM types yet
>>>>>+ */
>>>> Not true. The description only says that it's *most probably* compatible
>>>>with "physmap", that's all. I don't see why we have to limit ourselves here.
>>>Effectively we care about NOR chips and similar which are
>>>memory-mapped.
>> So what? How "physmap" follows from this?
> Okay, probably we can go you way naming of_device by what it's
> compatible with. So that "physmap" compatible would be called
> "physmap-flash", "nand"-compatible would be called "nand-flash" etc.
Actually, Generic Names spec tells to use the most generic user-parsable
names, just like I used initally ("flash")...
> Does that work for you?
No. Getting rid of "physmap" completely and using of_find_node_by_type()
does. :-)
> Vitaly
WBR, Sergei
More information about the Linuxppc-embedded
mailing list