> -----Original Message----- > From: Wood Scott-B07421 > Sent: Monday, October 29, 2007 2:44 PM > To: Yoder Stuart-B08248 > Cc: Matt Sealey; Dale Farnsworth; Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org > Subject: Re: RFC: replace device_type with new "class" property? > > Yoder Stuart-B08248 wrote: > > Here's an example of what I'm trying to get at-- take > > a node from a FSL device tree. The ideas I've heard > > for expressing the class are like this-- > > > > #1 don't express any class at all: > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] { > > compatible = "fsl,ucc_geth"; > > model = "UCC"; > > device-id = <3>; > > reg = <2200 200>; > > interrupts = <22>; > > interrupt-parent = < &qeic >; > > mac-address = [ 00 00 00 00 00 00 ]; > > local-mac-address = [ 00 00 00 00 00 00 ]; > > rx-clock = <19>; > > tx-clock = <1a>; > > phy-handle = < &phy3 >; > > pio-handle = < &pio3 >; > > Of course, this should properly be something like > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] { > compatible = "fsl,mpc8360-qe-enet", "fsl,qe-enet"; > local-mac-address = [ 00 00 00 00 00 00 ]; > ... > }; > > With no "mac-address", and a more useful "model" if any at all.
That's fine, but as a human reader there is nothing that would tell me this node implemented a defined binding that specified required properties. Stuart _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev