Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 8 Aug 2012 14:07:37 +0200 | From | Thierry Reding <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] x86/dt: use linear irq domain for ioapic(s). |
| |
On Wed, Aug 08, 2012 at 01:51:36PM +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > On 08/08/2012 12:46 PM, Thierry Reding wrote: > >On another note, I saw that you've used the "intel,ce4100" prefix in > >various places and I wonder if it would be useful to replace them with > >something more generic like "intel,hpet", "intel,lapic" and > >"intel,ioapic" respectively. The hardware that I use is based on an Atom > >N450 and works with the current code, so it really isn't ce4100- > >specific. > > No. You do have a compatible entry. It first appeared on the ce4100 > CPU. If it happens to also work on the n450 then it seems to be > compatible with that one. "This" is documented somewhere… > Usually you add 'compatible = "your cpu", "generic binding"' in case > you need a fixup / errata whatever for "your cpu". Even if you compare > all hpets from Intel there is the one or other difference / errata.
Exactly, but "ce4100-hpet" isn't very generic. What I'm saying is that the last entry in the compatible list should be something generic, like "intel,hpet", which can be overridden by putting a more specific entry in front. I'd expect the ce4100 HPET to use something like this:
compatible = "intel,ce4100-hpet", "intel,hpet";
On N450 this could for instance be:
compatible = "intel,n450-hpet", "intel,hpet";
With that in place, the driver code can match on "intel,hpet" to catch all implementations and use the more specific entries if quirks are required for the specific hardware.
Thierry [unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature] | |