Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Wed, 4 Aug 2021 01:14:54 +0530
From:   Raag Jadav <raagjadav@gmail.com>
To:     Li Yang <leoyang.li@nxp.com>
Cc:     Shawn Guo <shawnguo@kernel.org>, Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
        "moderated list:ARM/FREESCALE IMX / MXC ARM ARCHITECTURE" 
        <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
        "open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS" 
        <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>, lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: dts: ls1046a: fix eeprom entries
Message-ID: <20210803194454.GA9471@localhost>
References: <1627927742-8675-1-git-send-email-raagjadav@gmail.com>
 <CADRPPNQ2M1N1pV2brfFRXOf1ASK2bhiZpQivNhNws_+RUfCT-g@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CADRPPNQ2M1N1pV2brfFRXOf1ASK2bhiZpQivNhNws_+RUfCT-g@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30)
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Aug 02, 2021 at 05:44:29PM -0500, Li Yang wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 2, 2021 at 1:10 PM Raag Jadav <raagjadav@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > ls1046afrwy and ls1046ardb boards have CAT24C04[1] and CAT24C05[2]
> > eeproms respectively. Both are 4Kb (512 bytes) in size.
> 
> These part names are from onsemi instead of atmel.  Are there same
> part names from atmel which are also compatible with the onsemi parts?

The part names are different, but they are functionally compatible.

>  If we want to use onsemi only part names, probably we will need two
> compatible strings with the first one from onsemi and the second from
> atmel.  Although the binding doesn't support onsemi prefix yet.

Should I add it to the at24 binding document with atmel as a fallback?

> 
> > Remove multi-address entries, as we have auto-rollover support
> > in at24 driver.
> 
> The device tree should describe hardware instead of matching how
> driver deal with it.  Is the board really using a single chip or
> multiple chips here?

Yes, both the boards have a single chip each.

> 
> >
> > [1] https://www.onsemi.com/pdf/datasheet/cat24c01-d.pdf
> > [2] https://www.onsemi.com/pdf/datasheet/cat24c03-d.pdf
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Raag Jadav <raagjadav@gmail.com>
> > ---
> >  arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/fsl-ls1046a-frwy.dts | 8 +-------
> >  arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/fsl-ls1046a-rdb.dts  | 7 +------
> >  2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/fsl-ls1046a-frwy.dts b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/fsl-ls1046a-frwy.dts
> > index db3d303..83afe21 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/fsl-ls1046a-frwy.dts
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/fsl-ls1046a-frwy.dts
> > @@ -83,15 +83,9 @@
> >                         };
> >
> >                         eeprom@52 {
> > -                               compatible = "atmel,24c512";
> > +                               compatible = "atmel,24c04";
> >                                 reg = <0x52>;
> >                         };
> > -
> > -                       eeprom@53 {
> > -                               compatible = "atmel,24c512";
> > -                               reg = <0x53>;
> > -                       };
> > -
> >                 };
> >         };
> >  };
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/fsl-ls1046a-rdb.dts b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/fsl-ls1046a-rdb.dts
> > index 60acdf0..d220f98 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/fsl-ls1046a-rdb.dts
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/fsl-ls1046a-rdb.dts
> > @@ -59,14 +59,9 @@
> >         };
> >
> >         eeprom@52 {
> > -               compatible = "atmel,24c512";
> > +               compatible = "atmel,24c04";
> >                 reg = <0x52>;
> >         };
> > -
> > -       eeprom@53 {
> > -               compatible = "atmel,24c512";
> > -               reg = <0x53>;
> > -       };
> >  };
> >
> >  &i2c3 {
> > --
> > 2.7.4
> >