Hi, Arnd: 2018-01-22 19:15 GMT+08:00 Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx>: > On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 10:53 AM, Greentime Hu <green.hu@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> 2018-01-19 23:37 GMT+08:00 Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: >>> On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 4:35 PM, Greentime Hu <green.hu@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>> 2018-01-19 23:29 GMT+08:00 Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: >>>>> On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 4:18 PM, Greentime Hu <green.hu@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >>>> Thank you and your example. >>>> I get it. I will update this document like this. >>>> - compatible: Should be "andestech,<core_name>", "andestech,nds32v3" >>>> as fallback. >>> >>> And please keep a list of supported values of "andestech,<core_name>" >>> in the DT binding document, so checkpatch can validate compatible values. >>> >> >> Thank you for reminding me this. >> I will list it like this. >> >> - compatible: >> Usage: required >> Value type: <string> >> Definition: Should be "andestech,<core_name>", >> "andestech,nds32v3" as fallback. >> Examlpes with core_names are: >> "andestech,n13" >> "andestech,n15" >> "andestech,d15" >> "andestech,n10" >> "andestech,d10" > > This is still not written as a proper specification, you should not > give "examples" > but give a complete list of the available options. You could write it like: > > Must contain "andestech,nds32v3" as the most generic value, in addition to > one of the following identifiers for a particular CPU core: > "andestech,n13" > "andestech,n15" > "andestech,d15" > "andestech,n10" > "andestech,d10" > > It might be helpful to also list all other existing nds32v3 cores, > even those that the > current Linux port does not support them. > Thank you for the clear explanation. I will update it just like you wrote.
