Thread (17 messages) flat view 17 messages, 4 authors, 2013-12-13

[PATCH v2 4/6] ARM: brcmstb: add misc. DT bindings for brcm,brcmstb

From: Matt Porter <hidden>
Date: 2013-12-13 14:23:47
Also in: lkml

On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 04:22:26PM -0800, Marc Carino wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
Document the bindings that the Broadcom STB platform needs
for proper bootup.

Signed-off-by: Marc Carino <redacted>
Acked-by: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>
---
 .../devicetree/bindings/arm/brcm-brcmstb.txt       |   72 ++++++++++++++++++++
 1 files changed, 72 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
 create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/brcm-brcmstb.txt
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/brcm-brcmstb.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/brcm-brcmstb.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..2f3cd50
--- /dev/null
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/brcm-brcmstb.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,72 @@
+Broadcom STB platforms Device Tree Bindings
+-------------------------------------------
+Boards with Broadcom Brahma15-based BCM7xxx SOC shall have the following
+properties.
Does Brahma15 identify the ARM-based members of the BCM7xxx family? I
ask since it's a little confusing knowing that there's some MIPs-based
BCM7xxx SoCs and this binding is specific to the ARM versions.  Could the
ARM-based members be enumerated explicitly by part number? e.g. BCM7445,
etc.
+
+Required root node properties:
+    - compatible = "brcm,brcmstb";
Along the same lines...Isn't this a little too generic for a compatible
string? If BCM7445 were the first in this family wouldn't brcm,bcm7445
be more appropriate given the compatible string naming guidelines?

-Matt
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help