Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] dt-bindings: mtd: sunxi: Add new compatible

From: Miquel Raynal <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 5 Apr 2019 11:28:13 +0200

Hi Maxime,

Maxime Ripard <[email-masked]> wrote on Fri, 5 Apr 2019
11:13:02 +0200:

> Hi,
> 
> On Thu, Apr 04, 2019 at 06:21:09PM +0200, Miquel Raynal wrote:
> > The A33 NAND controller is slightly different than the A10+ ones,
> > eg. DMA handling is a bit different and a few register offsets
> > changed.
> >
> > Introduce a new compatible to represent this version of the IP.
> >
> > Also append '-controller' to the new compatible (which is required for
> > new compatibles) as this is describing a NAND controller and not a
> > NAND chip.  
> 
> Out of curiosity, why are you requiring that suffix now?

Because people are confused with the terminology and we see people
mixing all the terms very often: NAND controller, NAND bus, NAND
chip, ECC engine, etc. This node only describes a NAND controller, so
let be more precise and stop naming everything just "NAND".

> 
> > Signed-off-by: Miquel Raynal <[email-masked]>
> > ---
> >  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mtd/sunxi-nand.txt | 7 ++++++-
> >  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mtd/sunxi-nand.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mtd/sunxi-nand.txt
> > index dcd5a5d80dc0..6128d41d8c59 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mtd/sunxi-nand.txt
> > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mtd/sunxi-nand.txt
> > @@ -1,7 +1,12 @@
> >  Allwinner NAND Flash Controller (NFC)
> >
> >  Required properties:
> > -- compatible : "allwinner,sun4i-a10-nand".
> > +- compatible : Must be one of:
> > +	       - "allwinner,sun4i-a10-nand"
> > +	       - "allwinner,sun8i-a33-nand-controller"
> > +	       The former may be used by all IPs, however sun8i family
> > +	       will need the second one in order to make use of the
> > +	       internal DMA capabilities.  
> 
> I'm not sure we should have that statement. We have no idea whether or
> not this can be used by all IPs *today*, and we surely don't know
> about the one that are going to come out.

Shall I just drop the whole comment ("The former" ... "capabilities.")?

Thanks,
Miquèl
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
[email-masked]
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel