On Sun, Nov 04, 2007 at 12:52:47AM +0100, Marian Balakowicz wrote:
> Add device tree source file for TQM5200 board.
>
> Signed-off-by: Marian Balakowicz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
[snip]
> + [EMAIL PROTECTED] {
[EMAIL PROTECTED] is the new convention, I believe, but I guess you need
compatibility with older bootstraps.
> + model = "fsl,mpc5200";
> + compatible = "mpc5200";
This compatible looks bogus; it should have the "fsl," at least.
[snip]
> + mpc5200_pic: [EMAIL PROTECTED] {
> + // 5200 interrupts are encoded into two levels;
> + interrupt-controller;
> + #interrupt-cells = <3>;
> + device_type = "interrupt-controller";
No device_type here.
> + compatible = "mpc5200-pic";
> + reg = <500 80>;
> + };
> +
> + [EMAIL PROTECTED] { // General Purpose Timer
> + compatible = "fsl,mpc5200-gpt";
> + cell-index = <0>;
Ok, is this actually a suitable usage for cell-index? It should only
be used when the cell-index number is used to program some soc-global
register. It should not be used just for ordering or logical-indexing
purposes.
[snip]
> + [EMAIL PROTECTED] { // PSC1
> + device_type = "serial";
> + compatible = "mpc5200-psc-uart";
> + port-number = <0>; // Logical port assignment
> + cell-index = <0>;
Ditto w.r.t. cell-index.
port-number also looks bogus - the device tree should not generally
contain logical numbering information in this manner. How and what
uses the port-number property?
> + [EMAIL PROTECTED] {
> + compatible = "mpc5200-sram","sram";
Uh.. is there an "sram" binding? "sram" doesn't look specific enough
for a compatible property.
--
David Gibson | I'll have my music baroque, and my code
david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au | minimalist, thank you. NOT _the_ _other_
| _way_ _around_!
http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson
_______________________________________________
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
