On Fri, 24 Feb 2012 10:49:00 -0800, Tony Lindgren tony@atomide.com wrote:
- Rajendra Nayak rnayak@ti.com [120223 19:29]:
On Friday 24 February 2012 12:27 AM, Tony Lindgren wrote:
--- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/omap3.dtsi +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/omap3.dtsi @@ -113,5 +113,31 @@ #size-cells =<0>; ti,hwmods = "i2c3"; };
mmc1: mmc@1 {compatible = "ti,omap2-hsmmc";ti,hwmods = "mmc1";ti,dual-volt;};mmc2: mmc@2 {compatible = "ti,omap2-hsmmc";ti,hwmods = "mmc2";};mmc3: mmc@3 {compatible = "ti,omap2-hsmmc";ti,hwmods = "mmc3";};mmc4: mmc@4 {compatible = "ti,omap2-hsmmc";ti,hwmods = "mmc4";};mmc5: mmc@5 {compatible = "ti,omap2-hsmmc";ti,hwmods = "mmc5";};};
These all should all be "ti,omap3-hsmmc" I guess?
Well, I defined the binding such that both omap2 and omap3 can use the same compatible "ti,omap2-hsmmc" since there is no difference in the way they are defined or handled. If thats confusing, I can have separate compatibles. Btw, I guess we do the same with a few other re-used IPs as well, I just checked and mcpsi does the same.
Yeah let's use separate compatibles to avoid confusion. For omap2 we also have the ti,omap2-mmc in addition to ti,omap2-hsmmc..
Yes, absolutely use separate compatible values. It is always important to be specific as to the silicon implementing the IP. The omap3 instance can also carry the omap2 string in its compatible list:
compatible = "ti,omap3-hsmmc", "ti,omap2-hsmmc";
g.