On Mon, 2007-05-28 at 09:30 +1000, David Gibson wrote:

On Fri, May 25, 2007 at 04:11:59PM +0200, Segher Boessenkool wrote:

quoted

quoted

Waah!  Third time lucky?

You wish :-)

quoted

	- Second, the PHYs give only "bcm54xx" as a compatible
property.  This is unfortunate, because there are many bcm54xx PHY
models, and they have differences which can matter.  We add a more
precise compatible string, giving the precise PHY model (bcm5461A in
this case).

You completely removed the "compatible" properties instead.
Bad idea.

Um... weren't you the one that was just saying compatible properties
aren't necessary if you can distinguish the hardware in other ways?

In that case however, the 54xx are fairly different from each other, so
please use something more specific.

Ben.