On Sat, 23 Jul 2011 01:45:53 +0400
Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov [off-list ref] wrote:

I see your point. I just wasn't thinking too much about ot-of-tree trees.
My thought was that if someone updates the kernel, he can also update the dtb.

Sometimes there are firmware dependencies that make that difficult.  And
even if it's just user laziness/forgetfulness, that still translates to
extra support requests.

Could you please update the lbc.txt suggesting the compatibility
with simple-bus for lbc? Or you thing that it would be wrong?

I think we should define compatibility list as "fsl,mpcXXXX-localbus",
"fsl,pqXXXXX-localbus", "simple-bus", noting that by default new
platforms/boards should only use "simple-bus" internally. Does this
look reasonable for you? I can then try to provide a patch.

I'm OK with saying that localbus nodes should have simple-bus in new trees,
and defining canonical compatible values (chips with eLBC should be
"fsl,XXXX-elbc", "fsl,elbc", "simple-bus").  I'm not sure what you mean by
"should only use simple-bus internally", especially in the context of the
binding.

What do you suggest/prefer? To add .name="localbus" to generic code
or to have board-specific hooks (like one for mpc834xemitx)?

Just add localbus to the generic table.

-Scott