On Friday 18 December 2015 08:35:32 Wolfram Sang wrote: > > > > It seems to me that we have some consensus around: > > > > compatible = "renesas,r1ex24002", "24c02"; > > Thinking again, "generic,24c02" or "generic-24c02" could also be an > option. > > > Should this be added to Documentation/devicetree/bindings/eeprom/eeprom.txt ? > > Or documented elsewhere? > > Probably we need a DT maintainers advice here? I don't mind vendor > specific compatibles being documented, but I'm reluctant to add all > these compatibles for the myriads of I2C eeproms to the at24 driver. 99% > are covered by the generic case. > > Adding DT to CC. I'd rather use some vendor string in addition to 24c02. Isn't this originally an Atmel part? In that case, using "atmel,24c02" as the most generic string would be appropriate, and IIRC the i2c framework will just match that with the "24c02" entry in the i2c_device_id list. Arnd -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
