On Wednesday, November 2, 2016 3:28:01 PM CET Cédric Le Goater wrote: > On 11/02/2016 02:56 PM, Joel Stanley wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 11:45 PM, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> On Wednesday 02 November 2016, Cédric Le Goater wrote: > >>> The Aspeed SoCs have two BT interfaces : one is IPMI compliant and the > >>> other is H8S/2168 compliant. > >>> > >>> The current ipmi/bt-bmc driver implements the IPMI version and we > >>> should reflect its nature in the compatible node name using > >>> 'aspeed,ast2400-ibt-bmc' instead of 'aspeed,ast2400-bt-bmc'. The > >>> latter should be used for a H8S interface driver if it is implemented > >>> one day. > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Cédric Le Goater <clg@xxxxxxxx> > >> > >> We generally try to avoid changing the compatible strings after the > >> fact, but it's probably ok in this case. > > As the device tree changes are not merged yet, we thought we had some > more time to fine tune the naming. Ok, I see. No problem then. > >> I don't understand who decides which of the two interfaces is used: > >> is it the same register set that can be driven by either one or the > >> other driver, or do you expect to have two drivers that can both > >> be active in the same system and talk to different hardware once > >> you get there? > > > > It's the second case. The H8S BT has a different register layout so it > > would require a different driver. > > yes. > > > We don't yet have a driver for the other BT device, but there was > > recent talk of using it as an alternate (non-ipmi channel) between the > > BMC and the host. Before that discussion I wasn't aware that the H8S > > BT existed. I suggested we fix this up before it hits a final release. > > > > Cédric, do you think ast2400-ibt-bmc or ast2400-ipmi-bt-bmc does a > > better job of describing the hardware here? > > The specs refer to the two interfaces as BT (non IPMI) and iBT (IPMI). > I think we can keep the same naming. Ok > > While we're modifying the binding, should we add a compat string for > > the ast2500? > > Well, if the change in this patch is fine for all, may be we can add > the ast2500 compat string in a followup patch ? Sounds good to me. 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
