Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 29 Jun 2022 20:13:13 +0200 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v3 02/12] powerpc: wiiu: device tree | From | Krzysztof Kozlowski <> |
| |
On 29/06/2022 18:13, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > On Wed, Jun 29, 2022 at 11:58:18AM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >> On 28/06/2022 15:31, Ash Logan wrote: >>> + model = "nintendo,wiiu"; >> >> It's not compatible, but user-visible string, e.g. "Nintendo Wii U" > > The "model" property in OF is documented as: > > --- > “model” S > Standard property name to define a manufacturer’s model number. > > prop-encoded-array: > Text string, encoded with encode-string. > A manufacturer-dependent string that generally specifies the model name > and number (including revision level) for this device. The format of the > text string is arbitrary, although in conventional usage the string > begins with the name of the device’s manufacturer as with the “name” > property. > Although there is no standard interpretation for the value of the > “model” property, a specific device driver might use it to learn, for > instance, the revision level of its particular device. > > See also: property, model. > > Used as: " XYZCO,1416-02" encode-string " model" property
Hm, surprising to duplicate the compatible, but OK.
> --- > >>> + cpus { >>> + #address-cells = <1>; >>> + #size-cells = <0>; >>> + >>> + /* TODO: Add SMP */ >>> + PowerPC,espresso@0 { >> >> Node name should be generic, so "cpu". Unless something needs the >> specific node name? > > This is how most other PowerPC firmwares do it. The PowerPC processor > binding is older than the generic naming practice, so CPU nodes have > device_type "cpu" instead.
ePAPR 1.0 from 2008 explicitly asks for generic node names. So 4 years before Nintento Wii U. Maybe earlier ePAPR-s were also asking for this, no clue, don't have them.
> This is a required property btw, with that > value. (There is no requirement on the names of the CPU nodes).
That's fine, I am not talking about property.
> There is no added value in generic naming for CPU nodes anyway, since > you just find them as the children of the "/cpus" node :-)
There is because you might have there caches. It also makes code easier to read.
Best regards, Krzysztof
| |