>> Some silicons of Freescale processor are the same RapidIO controller,
quoted text
>> such as mpc8540/mpc8560 are the same (v0.0), mpc8548/mpc8641 are the
>> same (v1.0). For v1.0 RapidIO controller, should we use mpc8548 or
>> mpc8641? Those will make people confused.
>
> Not at all.  On an 8641 it could be
>
> 	compatible = "fsl,mpc8641-rapidio" "fsl,mpc8548-rapidio";
>
> which states "this is the 8641 thing and it is compatible
> to the 8548 thing".  Perfectly clear.

The concern is this isn't just compatible = "..8641.." "..8548.." but  
something like:

"..8641.." "..8641d.." "..8548.." "..8548e.." "..8543.." "..8543e.."  
"..8572.." "..8572e.." "..8567.." "..8567e.." "..8568.." "..8568e.."

quoted text
>> Using IP Block Revision is a
>> clear choice.
>
> I don't think so.  For one thing, it describes a version of
> a cell design, not a version of an actual device.  For another
> thing, if I hear "8641" I know what you're talking about (sort
> of, anyway), but I draw a blank stare if you say "v1.0".  I'm
> sure I'm not the only one.  Concrete names are good.

While I agree concrete names are good, we put these 'blocks' in so  
many devices that using the device to match on is pointless.

I'm all for making up a name like 'Grande', 'Del', 'Janeiro'.  This  
is effective what we did with gianfar.  The name gets picked up  
pretty quickly by people.

- k
-
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/