On Mar 6, 2008, at 6:27 PM, David Gibson wrote:

> [snip]
>> +            [EMAIL PROTECTED],0 {
>> +                    reg = <1 0x0 0x8000>;
>> +                    compatible = "fsl,mpc837xmds-bcsr";
>> +            };
>> +
>> +            [EMAIL PROTECTED],0 {
>
> This isn't a problem with this device tree, but it's probably time we
> started establishing some conventional generic names for nand flash
> and board-control devices.
>
> So, to start the ball rolling, I've seen several names for nand flash
> nodes, I'd suggest we standardise on "nand-flash".

This seems reasonable.

> I've seen several variants for board control devices (cpld, bcsr,
> fpga, etc.) I suggest we standardise on "board-control"

I don't see any reason for this.  If I have a cpld or fpga why not  
just call it that.  I don't see what calling it 'board-control' gets  
us.  There may be non-board control functionality in an fpga than what  
do we call it?

- k
_______________________________________________
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev

Reply via email to