ls1046afrwy and ls1046ardb boards have CAT24C04[1] and CAT24C05[2]
eeproms respectively. Both are 4Kb (512 bytes) in size.
Remove multi-address entries, as we have auto-rollover support
in at24 driver.
[1] https://www.onsemi.com/pdf/datasheet/cat24c01-d.pdf
[2] https://www.onsemi.com/pdf/datasheet/cat24c03-d.pdf
Signed-off-by: Raag Jadav <redacted>
---
arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/fsl-ls1046a-frwy.dts | 8 +-------
arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/fsl-ls1046a-rdb.dts | 7 +------
2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
On Mon, Aug 2, 2021 at 1:10 PM Raag Jadav [off-list ref] wrote:
ls1046afrwy and ls1046ardb boards have CAT24C04[1] and CAT24C05[2]
eeproms respectively. Both are 4Kb (512 bytes) in size.
These part names are from onsemi instead of atmel. Are there same
part names from atmel which are also compatible with the onsemi parts?
If we want to use onsemi only part names, probably we will need two
compatible strings with the first one from onsemi and the second from
atmel. Although the binding doesn't support onsemi prefix yet.
Remove multi-address entries, as we have auto-rollover support
in at24 driver.
The device tree should describe hardware instead of matching how
driver deal with it. Is the board really using a single chip or
multiple chips here?
On Mon, Aug 02, 2021 at 05:44:29PM -0500, Li Yang wrote:
On Mon, Aug 2, 2021 at 1:10 PM Raag Jadav [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
ls1046afrwy and ls1046ardb boards have CAT24C04[1] and CAT24C05[2]
eeproms respectively. Both are 4Kb (512 bytes) in size.
These part names are from onsemi instead of atmel. Are there same
part names from atmel which are also compatible with the onsemi parts?
The part names are different, but they are functionally compatible.
If we want to use onsemi only part names, probably we will need two
compatible strings with the first one from onsemi and the second from
atmel. Although the binding doesn't support onsemi prefix yet.
Should I add it to the at24 binding document with atmel as a fallback?
quoted
Remove multi-address entries, as we have auto-rollover support
in at24 driver.
The device tree should describe hardware instead of matching how
driver deal with it. Is the board really using a single chip or
multiple chips here?
On Tue, Aug 3, 2021 at 2:45 PM Raag Jadav [off-list ref] wrote:
On Mon, Aug 02, 2021 at 05:44:29PM -0500, Li Yang wrote:
quoted
On Mon, Aug 2, 2021 at 1:10 PM Raag Jadav [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
ls1046afrwy and ls1046ardb boards have CAT24C04[1] and CAT24C05[2]
eeproms respectively. Both are 4Kb (512 bytes) in size.
These part names are from onsemi instead of atmel. Are there same
part names from atmel which are also compatible with the onsemi parts?
The part names are different, but they are functionally compatible.
quoted
If we want to use onsemi only part names, probably we will need two
compatible strings with the first one from onsemi and the second from
atmel. Although the binding doesn't support onsemi prefix yet.
Should I add it to the at24 binding document with atmel as a fallback?
I think that will be the best.
quoted
quoted
Remove multi-address entries, as we have auto-rollover support
in at24 driver.
The device tree should describe hardware instead of matching how
driver deal with it. Is the board really using a single chip or
multiple chips here?
Yes, both the boards have a single chip each.
Then I am fine with the change, but please make it clear in the description.