On Mon, Sep 24, 2007 at 09:52:31AM -0500, Scott Wood wrote:
> David Gibson wrote:
> >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] {
> >> + #address-cells = <1>;
> >> + #size-cells = <0>;
> >> device_type = "i2c";
> >
> > Hrm... we probably want an "i2c" device_type class, but I don't think
> > we've actually defined one, which is a problem
>
> Right... but we need to get the kernel to stop expecting the device type
> to be there before we yell at people for including it. :-)
Obviously. We should make sure all the corresponding compatibles are
specific enough, change the drivers, then think about getting rid of
it.
> > The fact that NVRAM+RTC chips are so common is a bit of an issue from
> > the point of view of defining a device class binding - a device can't
> > have type "rtc" and "nvram".
>
> This is one of the reasons that I'd prefer to use compatible for such
> things.
Yeah, fair enough.
--
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
