From: Herbert Xu Subject: Re: [PATCH] crypto: caam - de-CHIP-ify device tree compatibles Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2011 21:24:09 +0800 Message-ID: <20110323132409.GD4374@gondor.apana.org.au> References: <20110315165220.d4fb60bc.kim.phillips@freescale.com> <20110316005951.GA18791@angua.secretlab.ca> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Kim Phillips , linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org, Scott Wood , Steve Cornelius , Kumar Gala To: Grant Likely Return-path: Received: from helcar.apana.org.au ([209.40.204.226]:40375 "EHLO fornost.hengli.com.au" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932600Ab1CWNYM (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Mar 2011 09:24:12 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20110316005951.GA18791@angua.secretlab.ca> Sender: linux-crypto-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 06:59:51PM -0600, Grant Likely wrote: > On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 04:52:20PM -0500, Kim Phillips wrote: > > - all the integration parameters have been captured by the binding. > > - the block name really uniquely identifies this hardware. > > > > Some advocate putting SoC names everywhere in case software needs > > to work around some chip-specific bug, but more precise SoC > > information already exists in SVR, and board information already > > exists in the top-level device tree node. > > > > Note that sometimes the SoC name is a worse identifier than the > > block version, as the block version can change between revisions > > of the same SoC. > > > > As a matter of historical reference, neither SEC versions 2.x > > nor 3.x (driven by talitos) ever needed CHIP references. > > > > Signed-off-by: Kim Phillips > > Very well. As long as some level of versioning is used on the > compatible values, I guess I can live with it. > > Acked-off-by: Grant Likely Patch applied. Thanks! -- Email: Herbert Xu Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/ PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt