On 10/05/2016 at 04:50:37 +0000, Yang, Wenyou wrote : > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Rob Herring [mailto:robh@xxxxxxxxxx] > > Sent: 2016年5月10日 4:13 > > To: Yang, Wenyou <Wenyou.Yang@xxxxxxxxx> > > Cc: Brian Norris <computersforpeace@xxxxxxxxx>; David Woodhouse > > <dwmw2@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@xxxxxxx>; Mark Brown > > <broonie@xxxxxxxxxx>; Ian Campbell <ijc+devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Kumar > > Gala <galak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux- > > mtd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Ferre, Nicolas > > <Nicolas.FERRE@xxxxxxxxx>; Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@free- > > electrons.com>; Jean-Christophe Plagniol-Villard <plagnioj@xxxxxxxxxxxx>; > > Russell King <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Josh Wu <rainyfeeling@xxxxxxxxxxx>; > > linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] mtd: atmel_nand: remove compatible "atmel,sama5d4- > > nfc" > > > > On Mon, May 09, 2016 at 02:51:17PM +0800, Wenyou Yang wrote: > > > It is a datasheet bug, for current SoCs, the RB_EDGE3(i.e. bit 27) of > > > HSMC_SR register does not exist, the RB_EDGE0 (i.e. bit 24) is the > > > ready/busy line edge status bit. So the compatible "atmel,sama5d4-nfc" > > > is unneeded. > > > > The compatible is needed if the SOC still exists. You can list both for the sama5d4 > > if the block is the same. > > The NFC IP of SAMA5D4 is same as SAMA5D2's, SAMA5D4 hase this issue. This compatible can be removed. > Well, I agree with Rob, we don't remove an existing compatible. Simply make it do the right thing (i.e. the same as sama5d3-nfc). -- Alexandre Belloni, Free Electrons Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering http://free-electrons.com -- 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
