Subject: [PATCH 2/8] arm: mach-armada: add source files

From: [email-masked] (Arnaud Patard (Rtp))
Date: Tue, 15 May 2012 12:00:14 +0200

Thomas Petazzoni <[email-masked]> writes:

Hi,
> Hello Andrew,
>
> Thanks for the quick feedback!
>
> Le Tue, 15 May 2012 11:12:18 +0200,
> Andrew Lunn <[email-masked]> a ?crit :
>
>> > +/include/ "armada.dtsi"
>> > +
>> > +/ {
>> > +	model = "Marvell Armada 370 family SoC";
>> > +	compatible = "marvell,armada370", "marvell,armada";
>> 
>> It should be mrvl, not marvell, in all the compatibility strings.
>
> Ok, we will change that.
>
>> Also, we need to be careful with armada. kirkwood is an armada for
>> example. It maybe be better to not actually use armada without
>> postfix.
>
> Do you have a recommendation for this? We support both Armada 370 and
> Armada XP, so the obvious common prefix for these two platforms is
> "armada". Since kirkwood are ARMv5 and those new Armada are ARMv7,
> would armadav7 be a better prefix? Then we could have armadav7-370 and
> armadav7-xp? Other suggestions?

Please be carefull with what you'll choose. There's also Dove SoCs
which are v7 too (88AP510 / armada 510 in Marvell namings). I would be
tempted to use "mrvl,dove" like was what was used for kirkwood so this
won't conflict but still, can be quite confusing.

Regards,
Arnaud