On Tue, Jan 08, 2008 at 08:58:17AM -0700, Grant Likely wrote: > On 1/7/08, Li Yang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > + [EMAIL PROTECTED] { > > + #address-cells = <1>; > > + #size-cells = <1>; > > + device_type = "soc"; > > I recommend dropping device_type and adding 'compatible = "fsl,mpc8377-immr";'
I recommend fixing the code that looks for this device_type before recommending that people drop it. :-) > > + [EMAIL PROTECTED] { > > + compatible = "mpc83xx_wdt"; > > "fsl,mpc8377_wdt", "fsl,mpc83xx_wdt" as per generic names recommended > practice. Speaking of generic names, can we change the node name to "watchdog"? > > + /* phy type (ULPI, UTMI, UTMI_WIDE, SERIAL) */ > > + [EMAIL PROTECTED] { > > + compatible = "fsl-usb2-dr"; > > + reg = <23000 1000>; > > + #address-cells = <1>; > > + #size-cells = <0>; > > + interrupt-parent = < &ipic >; > > + interrupts = <26 8>; > > + phy_type = "utmi_wide"; > > fsl,phy_type please. Again, code will break. Can we stop ambushing people submitting board support with complaints against existing, non-board-specific code/device trees? Fix that first, then complain if new code reintroduces the crud. Also, if we're going to change the property name, we should also change the underscore to a dash. > > + enet0: [EMAIL PROTECTED] { > > + cell-index = <0>; > > + device_type = "network"; > > + model = "eTSEC"; > > Drop model property Fix the code that checks for it. -Scott _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev