On 03/12/2014 11:30 PM, Ezequiel Garcia wrote:
The Armada 38x SoC family has a NAND controller, compatible with the controller in Armada 370/375/XP SoCs. Add support for it in the devicetree file.
Signed-off-by: Ezequiel Garcia <ezequiel.garcia@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> --- arch/arm/boot/dts/armada-38x.dtsi | 10 ++++++++++ 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)
diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/armada-38x.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/armada-38x.dtsi index 76cc27e..18d8f80 100644 --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/armada-38x.dtsi +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/armada-38x.dtsi @@ -345,6 +345,16 @@ clocks = <&mainpll>; clock-output-names = "nand"; }; + + nand@d0000 {
ePAPR standard [1] tells us:
The name of a node should be somewhat generic, reflecting the function of the device and not its precise programming model. If appropriate, the name should be one of the following choices:
[...] • flash
I think 'nand' is generic enough, isn't it?
It is but not more generic than "flash". :-)
In any case, it seems sane to distinguish a NAND flash from a NOR flash, from a SPI flash.
I don't know enough about the SPI flashes but this is only a node name, no more, so I think we can afford to be really generic...
FWIW, quite a few other SoCs have chosen 'nand' for the node name, including the other Armada variants. Was this a wrong choice?
I guess. There's a lot of wrong choices now all over the arch/arm/boot/dts/ because people are probably not aware of the necessary documentation such as http://devicetree.org/Device_Tree_Usage (pointing to ePAPR and having a passage on the generic device names too).
WBR, Sergei -- 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
