On Monday 24 March 2014 14:39:39 mohun106@xxxxxxxxx wrote: > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/cavium-thunder.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/cavium-thunder.txt > new file mode 100644 > index 0000000..6ea0a34 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/cavium-thunder.txt > @@ -0,0 +1,9 @@ > +Cavium Thunder platform device tree bindings > +--------------------------------------------- > + > +Boards with Cavium's Thunder SoC shall have following properties. > + > +Root Node > +--------- > +Required root node properties: > + - compatible = "cavium,thunder"; > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/cpus.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/cpus.txt > index 333f4ae..f6cadf1 100644 > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/cpus.txt > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/cpus.txt > @@ -163,6 +163,7 @@ nodes to be present and contain the properties described below. > "arm,cortex-r4" > "arm,cortex-r5" > "arm,cortex-r7" > + "cavium,thunder" > "faraday,fa526" > "intel,sa110" > "intel,sa1100" It seems very confusing to use the same name for both the SoC and the CPU core. Can you guarantee that there will never be another SoC with the same core, or a different CPU core in a SoC with the same name? If not, please be more specific here and use the exact model names rather than the product names. Arnd -- 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
