On 2016-12-09 00:32, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 7:23 PM, Peter Rosin <peda@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On 2016-12-08 18:47, Linus Walleij wrote:
>
>>> Before this patch, the following device tree node does not probe,
>>> which might be considered a bug:
>>>
>>> eeprom@52 {
>>> compatible = "atmel,at24c128";
>>
>> The way I read it, that should be "atmel,24c128", i.e. w/o the "at" prefix.
> (...)
>> and then lists the compatibles you have added to the match table (but you
>> have this extra "at" prefix for the atmel manufacturer).
>>
>> The way I read the above, you are free to use any manufacturer and still
>> have it work, and indeed, I have success with this node:
>>
>> eeprom@50 {
>> compatible = "nxp,24c02";
>> reg = <0x50>;
>> pagesize = <16>;
>> };
>>
>> I fear that your patch will regress this matching on the wildcard
>> manufacturer. I haven't tested that though, but there are enough
>> question marks anyway...
>
> Bah I probably just screwed up syntactically and now worked around
> a non-existing problem. I will try as you suggest, just "vendor,type"
> and see if it works. It probably does.
But it is a bit strange. Grepping for compatible.*24c finds quite
a few instances of "bad" compatible strings.
Many on the patterns at,24c256 and at24,24c256 (should be probably
be atmel,24c256) but also a few atmel,at24c16 and atmel,at24c128b.
I don't understand how those last ones ever worked, if it is not
working for you? Especially those with the trailing "b". WTF?
> Some days I feel just utterly stupid. Sorry for the fuzz.
Join the club...
Cheers,
Peter
> Wolfram: ignore the patch for now.
--
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
