Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Saturday 05 January 2008, Stefan Roese wrote:
>
>>> This is probably not specific enough. I'm rather sure that someone at IBM
>>> has implemented an i2c chip that this driver doesn't support. Maybe
>>>
>>> .compatible = "ibm,405-iic"
>>>
>>> or similar would be a better thing to check for.
>>>
>> .compatible = "ibm,4xx-iic"
>>
>> please, since 405 and 440 have the same I2C controller.
>>
>>
>
> But that's not how compatible properties work -- they should not
> contain wildcards. If you have different devices that are
> backwards compatible, you should list the older one in all
> newer devices, e.g. the 440 can list that it is compatible
> with both ibm,405-iic and ibm,440-iic. If there was an earlier
> 401 that had iic as well, you may even want to include that
> in the device tree.
>
> Arnd <><
>
Ok. The 44x based .dts files do not list 405-iic, so would I think I
will add two compatibility matches, one for 405 and one for 440EP. That
way I do not break all the current .dts files. Everybody ok with that?
Cheers,
Sean
_______________________________________________
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
