UCC nodes cleanup

- get rid of `model = "UCC"' in the ucc nodes
It isn't used anywhere, so remove it. If we'll ever need something like this, we'll use compatible property instead.
- replace cell-index and device-id properties by fsl,ucc.

Drivers are modified for backward compatibility's sake.

I'd prefer we use cell-index and not introduce "fsl,ucc".

Quoted 6 lines · Anton Vorontsov

- get rid of `model = "UCC"' in the ucc nodes
It isn't used anywhere, so remove it. If we'll ever need something like this, we'll use compatible property instead.
- replace cell-index and device-id properties by fsl,ucc.

Drivers are modified for backward compatibility's sake.

I'd prefer we use cell-index and not introduce "fsl,ucc". I'm ok with dropping device-id and model (its implied in the compatiable).

Quoted 6 lines · Kumar Gala

Quoted 5 lines · Anton Vorontsov

- get rid of `model = "UCC"' in the ucc nodes
It isn't used anywhere, so remove it. If we'll ever need something like this, we'll use compatible property instead.
- replace cell-index and device-id properties by fsl,ucc.

Quoted 3 lines

Quoted 1 line

Drivers are modified for backward compatibility's sake.

I'd prefer we use cell-index and not introduce "fsl,ucc". I'm ok with dropping device-id and model (its implied in the compatiable).

Ok. Here it is. netdev and linux-serial Cc'ed.

Quoted 7 lines · Anton Vorontsov

Quoted 6 lines · Kumar Gala

Quoted 5 lines · Anton Vorontsov

- get rid of `model = "UCC"' in the ucc nodes
It isn't used anywhere, so remove it. If we'll ever need something like this, we'll use compatible property instead.
- replace cell-index and device-id properties by fsl,ucc.

Quoted 5 lines

Quoted 3 lines

Quoted 1 line

Drivers are modified for backward compatibility's sake.

I'd prefer we use cell-index and not introduce "fsl,ucc". I'm ok with dropping device-id and model (its implied in the compatiable).

Ok. Here it is. netdev and linux-serial Cc'ed.

Do we want the first UCC to have a cell-index of 1? Maybe we should fix this off-by-one error once and for all, and number all UCCs from 0?

Quoted 2 lines

Do we want the first UCC to have a cell-index of 1? Maybe we should fix this off-by-one error once and for all, and number all UCCs from 0?

Isn't documentation numbers UCC from 1?

Then I believe we should stick
with it for device tree, since off by one is Linux implementation details.

Quoted 12 lines · Timur Tabi

Quoted 11 lines · Anton Vorontsov

Quoted 9 lines · Kumar Gala

Quoted 6 lines · Anton Vorontsov

- get rid of `model = "UCC"' in the ucc nodes
It isn't used anywhere, so remove it. If we'll ever need something like this, we'll use compatible property instead.
- replace cell-index and device-id properties by fsl,ucc.

Drivers are modified for backward compatibility's sake.

I'd prefer we use cell-index and not introduce "fsl,ucc". I'm ok with dropping device-id and model (its implied in the compatiable).

Quoted 4 lines

Quoted 1 line

Ok. Here it is. netdev and linux-serial Cc'ed.

Do we want the first UCC to have a cell-index of 1? Maybe we should fix this off-by-one error once and for all, and number all UCCs from 0?

Isn't documentation numbers UCC from 1? Then I believe we should stick with it for device tree, since off by one is Linux implementation details.

Or maybe I'm thinking here in terms of "fsl,ucc"... and cell-index is indeed should be -1... don't know. Please decide. ;-)

Quoted 2 lines · Anton Vorontsov

Or maybe I'm thinking here in terms of "fsl,ucc"... and cell-index is indeed should be -1... don't know. Please decide. ;-)

Well, that's what I was thinking. cell-index is zero-based, so UCC1 should have cell-index = <0>.

Of course, this means all the code needs to change, since I think device-id is one-based.

Quoted 8 lines · Timur Tabi

Quoted 2 lines · Anton Vorontsov

Or maybe I'm thinking here in terms of "fsl,ucc"... and cell-index is indeed should be -1... don't know. Please decide. ;-)

Well, that's what I was thinking. cell-index is zero-based, so UCC1 should have cell-index = <0>.

Quoted 2 lines

Of course, this means all the code needs to change, since I think device-id is one-based.

Yup. You raised a really good question, because we're _introducing_ cell-index for UCC nodes, and if we'll choice wrong numbering scheme now, then there will be no way back w/o breaking backward compatibility.

Quoted 12 lines · Anton Vorontsov

Quoted 10 lines · Timur Tabi

Quoted 2 lines · Anton Vorontsov

Or maybe I'm thinking here in terms of "fsl,ucc"... and cell-index is indeed should be -1... don't know. Please decide. ;-)

Well, that's what I was thinking. cell-index is zero-based, so UCC1 should have cell-index = <0>.

Of course, this means all the code needs to change, since I think device-id is one-based.

Quoted 3 lines

Yup. You raised a really good question, because we're _introducing_ cell-index for UCC nodes, and if we'll choice wrong numbering scheme now, then there will be no way back w/o breaking backward compatibility.

Hm... thinking about it more, we're introducing implementation for the cell-index, but device tree was "infected" already.

So, too late. :-D

I say leave as you have it (UCC1 == cell-index = <1>).

Changing it so cell-index = <0> is just more confusing w/regards to the docs.

Quoted 4 lines · Kumar Gala

I say leave as you have it (UCC1 == cell-index = <1>).

Changing it so cell-index = <0> is just more confusing w/regards to the docs.

I don't see anything in booting-without-of.txt that requires cell-index to start at 0, however, the only other device that starts at 1 is SATA. Even the SSI starts at 0:

- cell-index : the SSI, <0> = SSI1, <1> = SSI2, and so on

Although I don't want to make more work for Anton, my vote is to have cell-index start at 0. That is the convention. It's too late to fix SATA, but at least we can avoid making it worse.

Quoted 12 lines · Timur Tabi

Quoted 11 lines · Anton Vorontsov

Quoted 9 lines · Kumar Gala

Quoted 6 lines · Anton Vorontsov

- get rid of `model = "UCC"' in the ucc nodes
It isn't used anywhere, so remove it. If we'll ever need something like this, we'll use compatible property instead.
- replace cell-index and device-id properties by fsl,ucc.

Drivers are modified for backward compatibility's sake.

I'd prefer we use cell-index and not introduce "fsl,ucc". I'm ok with dropping device-id and model (its implied in the compatiable).

Quoted 4 lines

Quoted 1 line

Ok. Here it is. netdev and linux-serial Cc'ed.

Do we want the first UCC to have a cell-index of 1? Maybe we should fix this off-by-one error once and for all, and number all UCCs from 0?

Isn't documentation numbers UCC from 1? Then I believe we should stick with it for device tree, since off by one is Linux implementation details.

From: Anton Vorontsov <[email protected]>
Subject: [POWERPC] UCC nodes cleanup

- get rid of `model = "UCC"' in the ucc nodes
It isn't used anywhere, so remove it. If we'll ever need something like this, we'll use compatible property instead.
- replace last occurrences of device-id with cell-index. Drivers are modified for backward compatibility's sake.

Signed-off-by Anton Vorontsov <[email protected]>

From: Anton Vorontsov <[email protected]>
Subject: [POWERPC] UCC nodes cleanup

- get rid of `model = "UCC"' in the ucc nodes
It isn't used anywhere, so remove it. If we'll ever need something like this, we'll use compatible property instead.
- replace last occurrences of device-id with cell-index. Drivers are modified for backward compatibility's sake.

Signed-off-by Anton Vorontsov <[email protected]>

---

Documentation/powerpc/booting-without-of.txt |    6 ++----
arch/powerpc/boot/dts/mpc832x_mds.dts        |    7 +------
arch/powerpc/boot/dts/mpc832x_rdb.dts        |    4 ----
arch/powerpc/boot/dts/mpc836x_mds.dts        |    4 ----
arch/powerpc/boot/dts/mpc8568mds.dts         |    4 ----
drivers/net/ucc_geth.c                       |    8 +++++++-
drivers/net/ucc_geth_mii.c                   |   11 ++++++++---
drivers/serial/ucc_uart.c                    |   16 ++++++++++++----
8 files changed, 30 insertions(+), 30 deletions(-)