On Sat, Mar 8, 2014 at 3:09 PM, Rob Herring <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 7, 2014 at 5:28 PM, Florian Vaussard
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Placeholders <..> are sometimes used in the devicetree documentation
>> to define family-wide compatible strings (like fsl,<chip>-ipu where
>> chip can be any Freescale SoC).
>>
>> These placeholders are loosly defined. This lead to some
>> fragmentation. Looking at the current placeholders, we have:
>>
>> 3 <board>
>> 32 <chip>
>> 1 <chip name>
>> 1 <mcu-chip>
>> 1 <processor>
>> 30 <soc>
>> 1 <SOC>
>> 1 <soc-family>
>>
>> This patch consolidates this to:
>>
>> 3 <board>
>> 33 <chip>
>> 1 <mcu-chip>
>> 1 <processor>
>> 32 <soc>
>>
>
> I would prefer to consolidate these into just board and chip. If we
> have any oddballs, they can just document the exact strings.
Florian, Do you plan to re-spin this? I can take it for 3.15 if it is
early in the rc's.
Rob
Hi,
On 04/11/2014 02:25 AM, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 8, 2014 at 3:09 PM, Rob Herring <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On Fri, Mar 7, 2014 at 5:28 PM, Florian Vaussard
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> Placeholders <..> are sometimes used in the devicetree documentation
>>> to define family-wide compatible strings (like fsl,<chip>-ipu where
>>> chip can be any Freescale SoC).
>>>
>>> These placeholders are loosly defined. This lead to some
>>> fragmentation. Looking at the current placeholders, we have:
>>>
>>> 3 <board>
>>> 32 <chip>
>>> 1 <chip name>
>>> 1 <mcu-chip>
>>> 1 <processor>
>>> 30 <soc>
>>> 1 <SOC>
>>> 1 <soc-family>
>>>
>>> This patch consolidates this to:
>>>
>>> 3 <board>
>>> 33 <chip>
>>> 1 <mcu-chip>
>>> 1 <processor>
>>> 32 <soc>
>>>
>>
>> I would prefer to consolidate these into just board and chip. If we
>> have any oddballs, they can just document the exact strings.
>
> Florian, Do you plan to re-spin this? I can take it for 3.15 if it is
> early in the rc's.
>
Yes sure, I can re-spin this as soon as 3.15-rc1 is out.
Regards,
Florian