[PATCH] ARM: kirkwood: DT board setup for Network Space v2 and parents

[Andrew Lunn]

> >> The question is, what is the appropriate name. How common is
> >> this common C code? Are there ns2 where this C code is not
> >> appropriate. One thing to remember is that most of this C code
> >> will soon disappear and become DT. All the mpp will be replaced
> >> with pinctrl in 3.8. I hope we can get the Ethernet setup in DT
> >> as well. You are working on ns2_led, so all the C code will be
> >> replaced by DT. So all we are really left with is power off GPIO
> >> handling.
> >> 
> >> So i think the danger of using lacie,ns2_common, and then finding
> >> it does not work with some other ns2 device is quite low.
> 
> lacie,ns2_common doesn't sound like a HW description, but rather a SW
> invention. DT should be describing purely the HW. If there's no common
> HW between these compatible boards (which seems unlikely), then there
> shouldn't be a shared compatible value.

Actually, there is common hardware between these boards:

NS2 LED driver
Pinctrl setup
GPIO used for power off
Ethernet configuration.

At the moment, we don't have DT for these, so there is C code.  The
"lacie,ns2_common" compatibility string would be used to enable this C
code for these boards.

     Andrew