> If this is truly specific to at24, then vendor prefix would be appropriate, > plus it'd go to an at24 specific binding file. However if it isn't I'd just > remove the above sentence. I guess the latter? Yes, no-read-rollover is truly specific to at24.c, because it applies only to i2c multi-address chips. The at25 is spi based so cannot have multiple addresses. So yes, "at24,no-read-rollover" would perhaps be a better name. Regarding an at24 specific binding file. You're saying I should create Documentation/devicetree/bindings/eeprom/at24.txt ? Should I indicate that at24.txt "inherits from" eeprom.txt? Note that at25.txt does not currently do this. -- 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
