> -----Original Message----- > From: Wood Scott-B07421 > Sent: Friday, January 11, 2013 1:19 AM > To: Singh Sandeep-B37400 > Cc: Wood Scott-B07421; devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org; linuxppc- > d...@ozlabs.org; Aggrwal Poonam-B10812 > Subject: Re: [PATCH] Added device tree binding for TDM and TDM phy > > On 01/10/2013 03:24:21 AM, Singh Sandeep-B37400 wrote: > > > > > +- compatible > > > > > + Value type: <string> > > > > > + Definition: Should contain generic compatibility like > > > > "tdm-phy-slic" > > > > > or > > > > > + "tdm-phy-e1" or "tdm-phy-t1". > > > > > > Does this "generic" string (plus the other properties) tell you all > > you > > > need to know about the device? If there are other possible > > "generic" > > > compatibles, they should be listed or else different people will > > make up > > > different strings for the same thing. > > > > This property will describe the type of device, and will help TDM > > framework to know if it is E1/T1/SLIC device. Further details can be > > extracted from other compatible strings. > > There are only three generic compatibles field types, which are > > already mentioned in definition. Do I need to make this thing more > > clear. > > The word "like" suggests that there are other possibilites. It would be > clearer as: > > Definition: One of "tdm-phy-slic", "tdm-phy-e1", or "tdm-phy-t1". > > -Scott Ok, thanks for your comments.
_______________________________________________ devicetree-discuss mailing list devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/devicetree-discuss