Hi Grant,

On 12/05/2012 04:22 PM, Grant Likely wrote:

On Wed,  5 Dec 2012 20:09:31 +0100, Daniel Mack [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

This patch adds basic DT bindings for OMAP GPMC.

The actual peripherals are instantiated from child nodes within the GPMC
node, and the only type of device that is currently supported is NAND.

Code was added to parse the generic GPMC timing parameters and some
documentation with examples on how to use them.

Successfully tested on an AM33xx board.

Signed-off-by: Daniel Mack <redacted>
---
 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/bus/ti-gpmc.txt  |  77 ++++++++++
 .../devicetree/bindings/mtd/gpmc-nand.txt          |  76 +++++++++
 arch/arm/mach-omap2/gpmc.c                         | 171 ++++++++++++++++++++-
 3 files changed, 323 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
 create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/bus/ti-gpmc.txt
 create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mtd/gpmc-nand.txt

diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/bus/ti-gpmc.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/bus/ti-gpmc.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..7d2a645
--- /dev/null
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/bus/ti-gpmc.txt

@@ -0,0 +1,77 @@
+Device tree bindings for OMAP general purpose memory controllers (GPMC)
+
+The actual devices are instantiated from the child nodes of a GPMC node.
+
+Required properties:
+
+ - compatible:		Should be set to "ti,gpmc"

Please, be specific. Use something like "ti,am3340-gpmc" or
"ti,omap3430-gpmc". The compatible property is a list so that new
devices can claim compatibility with old. Compatible strings that are
overly generic are a pet-peave of mine.

We aim to use the binding for omap2,3,4,5 as well as the am33xx devices
(which are omap based). Would it be sufficient to have "ti,omap2-gpmc"
implying all omap2+ based devices or should we have a compatible string
for each device supported?

Thanks
Jon