On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 10:19:38AM +0200, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote: > 2018-06-27 7:46 GMT+02:00 <alanx.chiang@xxxxxxxxx>: > > From: Alan Chiang <alanx.chiang@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > The AT24 series chips use 8-bit address by default. If some > > chips would like to support more than 8 bits, the at24 driver > > should be added the compatible field for specfic chips. > > > > Provide a flexible way to determine the addressing bits through > > address-width in this patch. > > > > Signed-off-by: Alan Chiang <alanx.chiang@xxxxxxxxx> > > Signed-off-by: Andy Yeh <andy.yeh@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > --- > > since v1: > > -- Remove the address-width field in the example. > > since v2: > > -- Remove redundant space. > > > > --- > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/eeprom/at24.txt | 2 ++ > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/eeprom/at24.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/eeprom/at24.txt > > index 61d833a..aededdb 100644 > > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/eeprom/at24.txt > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/eeprom/at24.txt > > @@ -72,6 +72,8 @@ Optional properties: > > > > - wp-gpios: GPIO to which the write-protect pin of the chip is connected. > > > > + - address-width: number of address bits (one of 8, 16). > > + > > Example: > > > > eeprom@52 { > > -- > > 2.7.4 > > > > Rob, > > we only have two possibilities here and the default is 8 bits. > > What do you think about introducing a boolean property here called: > 'address-width-16' instead of an integer? I'd have thought the same, but it turns out address-width is already being used by the at25 bindings: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/eeprom/at25.txt -- Sakari Ailus sakari.ailus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx -- 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