On Thu, 2017-08-10 at 21:17 +0000, Chris Packham wrote: > On 11/08/17 08:38, Rob Herring wrote: > > On Mon, Aug 07, 2017 at 01:46:39PM +1200, Chris Packham wrote: [...] > > > +Optional properties: > > > + - marvell,reduced-width: some SoCs that use this SDRAM controller have > > > + a reduced pin count. On such systems "full" width is 32-bits and > > > + "half" width is 16-bits. Set this property to indicate that the SoC > > > + used is such a system. > > > > Maybe you should just state what the width is. > > Specifying a number like 64/32/16 is done in for some other properties I > dismissed that because what this is about how we interpret a > pin-strapping option. I guess "max-width = <64>;" and "max-width = > <32>"; would achieve the same. > > > Or your compatible string should just be specific enough to know the > > width. > > I decided against a new compatible sting that because the IP block > really is the Armada-XP one and the existing compatible string is used > in other places (using multiple compatible strings would solve that). > > I'm not too fussed which of the 3 options are used. Is there any > particular preference? I'd prefer a specific compatible string, as it would avoid adding even more properties if further difference turn up. Rob, I seem to remember that some drivers match the top-level compatible against a list of SoC variants to detect SoC-dependent features in a generic IP block. Is that something you'd prefer instead? Regards, Jan -- 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
