On 25/11/14 14:52, Hans de Goede wrote: >>> +Required properties: >>> +- compatible: "allwinner,simple-framebuffer" >>> +- allwinner,pipeline, one of: >> >> Sorry my ignorance, but what's sunxi and what's allwinner? Both names >> are mixed here. > > sunxi is the sun#i SoCs from Allwinner, Allwinner is the manufacturer > and the > SoC "code" names used everywhere in the kernel for their SoCs are sun4i, > sun5i, > sun6i, etc. Most people refer to these SoCs as sunxi. This is also what the > linux-sunxi mailinglist in the Cc is about. > > The official devicetree vendor prefix for Allwinner is allwinner, hence the > allwinner in the compatible name, see e.g. also > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/input/sun4i-lradc-keys.txt > > Which also uses sunxi / sun4i everywhere except in the compatible vendor > prefix. Alright, thanks for explanation. Shouldn't the compatible then be "allwinner,sunxi-simple-framebuffer", to differentiate from some other SoC Allwinner has or might create in the future? That is, presuming you're confident enough that a single compatible string covers all the current and forthcoming sunxi SoCs. Perhaps simplefb is a bit special case, but I usually feel better if the compatible string is defined in a more specific manner. In this case I'd have: allwinner,sun4i-simple-framebuffer allwinner,sun5i-simple-framebuffer allwinner,sun6i-simple-framebuffer so that if sun7i has totally different display controller, there would be no conflict. Tomi
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
