This isn't a problem with this device tree, but it's probably time we
started establishing some conventional generic names for nand flash
and board-control devices.
So, to start the ball rolling, I've seen several names for nand flash
nodes, I'd suggest we standardise on "nand-flash".
What's wrong with the already well-established generic name "flash"?
I was concerned that using "flash" for both NOR flash (which it
already is) and NAND flash might be unwise. I am quite open to being
convinced otherwise, though.
You already said you're convinced, but I'll add another argument
anyway...
For NAND flash, there will usually be a parent node named
"nand-controller"
or similar, while NOR flash will typically be direct-mapped.
There is always this tension between making the names as generic as
possible, and not losing too much information. In my experience, you
can always make leaf nodes have very very generic names, it's only the
bus nodes where this can be harder. And then there are exceptions like
"board-control" where there just _is_ no really good name ;-)
Segher
_______________________________________________
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
