> > > > > In any case, if "qoriq" makes sense for the compatible, I don't
> > > > > see why it doesn't make sense for the driver.
> > > > >
> > > > So, "Corenet" is appropriate for driver.
> > > > If something should change, that must be compatible string.
> > >
> > > No. Corenet is a bus interconnect, not a chip family (despite abuse
> > > of the name in other contexts in Linux/U-Boot). And the binding
> > > with qoriq has already been accepted.
> > >
> > QorIQ is not the best name either since it include the low-end socs.
> > What the name should be?
>
> Again, those low-end chips do not implement "QorIQ Chassis 1.0" or "QorIQ
> Chassis 2.0". That they have "QorIQ" in their name is irrelevant.
>
Got it.
Regards,
Yuantian
> -Scott
>
��.n��������+%������w��{.n����z�{��ܨ}���Ơz�j:+v�����w����ޙ��&�)ߡ�a����z�ޗ���ݢj��w�f
