On 07/23/2013 03:01:17 AM, Liu Po-B43644 wrote:

=20

quoted

 -----Original Message-----
 From: Wood Scott-B07421
 Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2013 6:41 AM
 To: Liu Po-B43644
 Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org; Hu Mingkai-B21284
 Subject: Re: [1/4] powerpc/85xx: Add SEC6.0 device tree

 On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 09:54:14AM +0800, Po Liu wrote:
 > From: Mingkai Hu [off-list ref]
 >
 > Add device tree for SEC 6.0 used on C29x silicon.
 >
 > Signed-off-by: Mingkai Hu [off-list ref]
 > Singed-off-by: Po Liu [off-list ref]

 I've heard of patches being flamed, but here we want signing, not
 singeing. :-)

 Don't forget that you can use the -s option to have git add the =20

signoff

quoted

 for you.

 > ---
 > Base on git://git.am.freescale.net/gitolite/mirrors/linux-2.6.git

 This URL is not accessible outside Freescale, so don't reference =20

it when

quoted

 posting patches publicly.

 If your patch is against the latest upstream code, you don't need =20

to say

quoted

 anything special about that.  You only need to make a note when =20

it's

quoted

 against some other yet-to-be-merged tree or patch.

 > +	compatible =3D "fsl,sec-v6.0", "fsl,sec-v5.2",
 > +		     "fsl,sec-v5.0", "fsl,sec-v4.4",
 > +		     "fsl,sec-v4.0";
 > +	fsl,sec-era =3D <6>;
 > +	#address-cells =3D <1>;
 > +	#size-cells =3D <1>;
 > +
 > +	jr@1000 {
 > +		compatible =3D "fsl,sec-v6.0-job-ring",
 > +			     "fsl,sec-v5.2-job-ring",
 > +			     "fsl,sec-v5.0-job-ring",
 > +			     "fsl,sec-v4.4-job-ring",
 > +			     "fsl,sec-v4.0-job-ring";
 > +		reg	   =3D <0x1000 0x1000>;
 > +	};
 > +
 > +	jr@2000 {
 > +		compatible =3D "fsl,sec-v6.0-job-ring",
 > +			     "fsl,sec-v5.2-job-ring",
 > +			     "fsl,sec-v5.0-job-ring",
 > +			     "fsl,sec-v4.4-job-ring",
 > +			     "fsl,sec-v4.0-job-ring";
 > +		reg	   =3D <0x2000 0x1000>;
 > +	};

 You claim compatibility with a bunch of prior SECs, but sec-v5.2 =20

has four

quoted

 job rings and an rtic node.  Likewise for the previous compatibles =20

listed.

quoted

 This has two job rings and no rtic.

So, shall I remove "fsl,sec-v5.2","fsl,sec-v5.0", "fsl,sec-v4.4", =20
"fsl,sec-v4.0" since all other SEC with 4 job rings? and only leave =20
"fsl,sec-v6.0"?

Yes, I think so.

quoted

 Can you point to where in the SEC v4.0 binding (I don't see a =20

binding for

quoted

 the subsequent versions), it says that these are optional?

I found SEC V4.0 in file qoriq-sec4.0-0.dtsi. If "fsl,sec-v4.0" not =20
in the compatible list, it is no use in this compatible list. But =20
seems keep the "fsl,sec-v4.0-job-ring" job ring compatible is ok. Is =20
that what you were ask?

No, I was talking about binding documents:
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/crypto/

-Scott=