Hello Bartosz, Nice patch. On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 2:08 PM, Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > Current description of the compatible property for at24 is quite vague. > > Specify an exact list of accepted compatibles and document the - now > deprecated - strings which were previously used in device tree files. > > Signed-off-by: Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@xxxxxxxx> > --- > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/eeprom/at24.txt | 50 +++++++++++++---------- > 1 file changed, 28 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/eeprom/at24.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/eeprom/at24.txt > index cbc80e194ac6..6ccbd000bfa4 100644 > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/eeprom/at24.txt > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/eeprom/at24.txt > @@ -2,28 +2,34 @@ EEPROMs (I2C) > > Required properties: > > - - compatible : should be "<manufacturer>,<type>", like these: > - > - "atmel,24c00", "atmel,24c01", "atmel,24c02", "atmel,24c04", > - "atmel,24c08", "atmel,24c16", "atmel,24c32", "atmel,24c64", > - "atmel,24c128", "atmel,24c256", "atmel,24c512", "atmel,24c1024" > - > - "catalyst,24c32" > - > - "microchip,24c128" > - > - "ramtron,24c64" > - > - "renesas,r1ex24002" > - > - The following manufacturers values have been deprecated: > - "at", "at24" > - > - If there is no specific driver for <manufacturer>, a generic > - device with <type> and manufacturer "atmel" should be used. > - Possible types are: > - "24c00", "24c01", "24c02", "24c04", "24c08", "24c16", "24c32", "24c64", > - "24c128", "24c256", "24c512", "24c1024", "spd" > + - compatible: must be one of the following: > + > + "atmel,24c00", > + "atmel,24c01", > + "atmel,24c02", > + "atmel,24c04", > + "atmel,24c08", > + "atmel,24c16", > + "atmel,24c32", > + "atmel,24c64", > + "atmel,24c128", > + "atmel,24c256", > + "atmel,24c512", > + "atmel,24c1024" > + > + NOTE: old compatible strings, such as: > + > + "catalyst,24c32", > + "microchip,24c128", > + "ramtron,24c64", > + "renesas,r1ex24002", > + "at,24c08", > + "at24,24c08" > + > + will still work, but are now deprecated. > + > + Also: matching by device type alone - while still supported due to > + implementation details in I2C core - is deprecated as well. > I don't think that's correct to mention Linux specific implementation details in a Device Tree binding. It's supposed to be OS independent and in theory the same DT binding could be used in other OS / bootloaders. With that last paragraph removed, feel free to add: Reviewed-by: Javier Martinez Canillas <javierm@xxxxxxxxxx> > - reg : the I2C address of the EEPROM > Best regards, Javier
