On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 01:24:44PM -0600, Scott Wood wrote:

Whatever string is used should be written into a binding document.

fsl,etsec-v1.6-ptp seems like it would be just as good for that purpose.

Even just fsl,etsec-ptp will identify the binding, though it's lacking in
identifying the hardware (in the absence of access to the eTSEC ID
registers).

I read the conversation, and I don't mind admitting that I do not
understand what you both are arguing/discussing about.

How should I set the strings?  Like this?

arch/powerpc/boot/dts/mpc8313erdb.dts:
	ptp_clock@24E00 {
		compatible = "fsl,mpc8313-etsec-ptp";
	}
arch/powerpc/boot/dts/mpc8572ds.dts:
	ptp_clock@24E00 {
		compatible = "fsl,mpc8572-etsec-ptp";
	} 
arch/powerpc/boot/dts/p2020ds.dts:
	ptp_clock@24E00 {
		compatible = "fsl,p2020ds-etsec-ptp";
	} 
arch/powerpc/boot/dts/p2020rdb.dts:
	ptp_clock@24E00 {
		compatible = "fsl,p2020rdb-etsec-ptp";
	} 

drivers/net/gianfar_ptp.c:

static struct of_device_id match_table[] = {
	{ .compatible = "fsl,mpc8313-etsec-ptp" },
	{ .compatible = "fsl,mpc8572-etsec-ptp" },
	{ .compatible = "fsl,p2020ds-etsec-ptp" },
	{ .compatible = "fsl,p2020rdb-etsec-ptp" },
	{},
};

Please let me know if this is what you meant.

Thanks,
Richard