public inbox for linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org 
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab•ca>
To: Timur Tabi <timur@freescale•com>
Cc: Mitch Bradley <wmb@firmworks•com>,
	Scott Wood <scottwood@freescale•com>,
	devicetree-discuss@lists•ozlabs.org, linuxppc-dev@ozlabs•org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] powerpc/fsl: add device tree binding for QE firmware
Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2010 12:20:34 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <fa686aa41003261120o15fea3cev8ca625f389bc8664@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4BACD011.5050609@freescale.com>

On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 9:17 AM, Timur Tabi <timur@freescale•com> wrote:
> Grant Likely wrote:
>
>> +- fsl,firmware:
>> + =A0 =A0Usage: Optional.
>> + =A0 =A0Value type: <prop-encoded-array>, encoded array of bytes
>> + =A0 =A0Definition: Contains the QUICC engine firmware blob.
>> [plus any other properties needed for firmware metadata]
>
> This would place the firmware metadata properties inside the QE node itse=
lf, which would break the QE binding.

Not really true.  Adding extra properties seldom breaks a binding.
It's a wash when compared with compared with adding a node.  But
that's not really an important debate.

> Here, the fsl,qe-firmware-eccr property is associated with the QE itself.=
 =A0This is why I want a compatible property for the firmware node, no matt=
er where it is. =A0Then you can do this:
>
> =A0 =A0 =A0 qe1: qe@e0080000 {
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 compatible =3D "fsl,qe";
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 fsl,qe_firmware {
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 compatible=3D"fsl,qe-firmware=
";
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 fsl,firmware =3D /bininc/("fi=
rmware-blob.bin");
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 fsl,qe-firmware-eccr =3D <0x0=
0000000 0x00001230>;
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 }
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 ...
> =A0 =A0 =A0 }
>
> Without the compatible property, the only way I'd know that the child nod=
e contains a firmware is to look at the actual name of the child node, whic=
h (as Scott and I believe) is not better than a compatible property.

If it is always a child of a qe node, then I've got no objections.

g.

--=20
Grant Likely, B.Sc., P.Eng.
Secret Lab Technologies Ltd.

  reply	other threads:[~2010-03-26 18:20 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 46+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-03-23 21:42 [PATCH] powerpc/fsl: add device tree binding for QE firmware Timur Tabi
2010-03-24  6:07 ` Grant Likely
2010-03-24 12:05   ` Timur Tabi
2010-03-24 17:00     ` Segher Boessenkool
2010-03-24 17:07       ` Grant Likely
2010-03-24 17:31         ` Timur Tabi
2010-03-24 18:10           ` Grant Likely
2010-03-24 18:21             ` Mitch Bradley
2010-03-24 18:25             ` Timur Tabi
2010-03-24 18:24           ` M. Warner Losh
2010-03-24 18:31             ` Timur Tabi
2010-03-25  1:49           ` Segher Boessenkool
2010-03-25 14:42             ` Timur Tabi
2010-03-25 16:10               ` Grant Likely
2010-03-25 16:34                 ` Scott Wood
2010-03-25 16:46                   ` Timur Tabi
2010-03-26 18:23                     ` Rafal Jaworowski
2010-03-25 23:53               ` M. Warner Losh
2010-03-26  0:22                 ` Timur Tabi
2010-03-25 15:16             ` Scott Wood
2010-03-25 15:29               ` Mitch Bradley
2010-03-25 16:16                 ` Grant Likely
2010-03-25 16:36                   ` Timur Tabi
2010-03-25 16:50                     ` Scott Wood
2010-03-25 16:59                     ` Grant Likely
2010-03-25 17:03                       ` Timur Tabi
2010-03-25 17:35                         ` Grant Likely
2010-03-25 18:05                           ` Timur Tabi
2010-03-25 19:53                           ` Scott Wood
2010-03-25 20:04                             ` Timur Tabi
2010-03-25 21:54                               ` Grant Likely
2010-03-25 22:19                                 ` Timur Tabi
2010-03-25 21:39                             ` Grant Likely
2010-03-25 22:47                               ` Scott Wood
2010-03-25 21:22                       ` David Gibson
2010-03-26  1:26                     ` Grant Likely
2010-03-26 15:17                       ` Timur Tabi
2010-03-26 18:20                         ` Grant Likely [this message]
2010-03-26 18:39                           ` Timur Tabi
2010-03-26 18:44                             ` Grant Likely
2010-03-26 18:48                               ` Timur Tabi
2010-03-26 18:56                                 ` Grant Likely
2010-03-26 18:58                                 ` Mitch Bradley
2010-03-26 19:07                                   ` Grant Likely
2010-03-26 18:48                             ` Mitch Bradley
2010-03-24 18:27         ` Scott Wood

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=fa686aa41003261120o15fea3cev8ca625f389bc8664@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=grant.likely@secretlab$(echo .)ca \
    --cc=devicetree-discuss@lists$(echo .)ozlabs.org \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@ozlabs$(echo .)org \
    --cc=scottwood@freescale$(echo .)com \
    --cc=timur@freescale$(echo .)com \
    --cc=wmb@firmworks$(echo .)com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox