Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 27 Mar 2023 14:01:53 -0500 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2 2/4] doc: Add Atmel AT30TSE serial eeprom | From | Eddie James <> |
| |
On 3/27/23 10:18, Rob Herring wrote: > On Tue, Mar 21, 2023 at 10:55:43AM -0500, Eddie James wrote: >> On 3/21/23 10:46, Eddie James wrote: >>> On 3/21/23 10:19, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>>> On 21/03/2023 16:16, Eddie James wrote: >>>>> The AT30TSE is compatible with the JEDEC EE1004 standard. Document it >>>>> as a trivial I2C device. >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Eddie James <eajames@linux.ibm.com> >>>> Use subject prefixes matching the subsystem (which you can get for >>>> example with `git log --oneline -- DIRECTORY_OR_FILE` on the directory >>>> your patch is touching). >>> >>> Oops, sorry, will fix. >>> >>> >>>>> --- >>>>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/trivial-devices.yaml | 2 ++ >>>>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) >>>>> >>>>> diff --git >>>>> a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/trivial-devices.yaml >>>>> b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/trivial-devices.yaml >>>>> index 6f482a254a1d..43e26c73a95f 100644 >>>>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/trivial-devices.yaml >>>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/trivial-devices.yaml >>>>> @@ -47,6 +47,8 @@ properties: >>>>> - ams,iaq-core >>>>> # i2c serial eeprom (24cxx) >>>>> - at,24c08 >>>>> + # i2c serial eeprom (EE1004 standard) >>>> AT30TSE? >>>> >>>>> + - atmel,at30tse >>>> Microchip does not find anything on AT30TSE. Are you sure this is the >>>> model name? >>> >>> Yes: https://www.microchip.com/content/dam/mchp/documents/OTH/ProductDocuments/DataSheets/Atmel-8868-DTS-AT30TSE004A-Datasheet.pdf >>> >>> >>> Maybe it's actually an 8868? Or should I include the 004A as well? >> >> I found some other AT30TSE (AT30TSE752A for example) devices that do not >> appear compatible with the EE1004 standard, so I will include the full model >> number. > If this standard is sufficiently complete, then you might want a EE1004 > fallback compatible. Complete would mean power supply(ies) and any extra > i/o are defined and the exact device model is discoverable.
I don't think this standard would meet those requirements unfortunately. Thanks for the suggestion!
Eddie
> > Rob
| |