> >>>> However, when I first read this I thought it should be a -a0 specific > >>>> compatible string, not a 'offload-broken' property - any idea what the > >>>> DT consensus is here? I've seen both approach in use .. > >>> > >>> I prefer the replacement of the compatible string. If it should really > >>> be a seperate property, then it should be a vendor specific property. It > >>> is not generic, at all. > >> > >> Something like "marvell,offload-broken" would be acceptable? > > > > A tad more, yes. Still, since this is a feature/quirk of the IP core > > revision, it should be deduced from the compatible property IMO. It > > cannot be configured anywhere, so it doesn't change on board level. > > So you would prefer using the "marvell,mv78230-a0-i2c" comaptible string and > updating it with the follwing piece of code? This is the approach I favour, yes. Can't say much about the implementation. Looks OK, but dunno if this is minimal...
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
