As noted here [1], there are potentially future conflicts if we try to
use MTD's "partitions" subnode to describe anything besides just the
fixed-in-the-device-tree partitions currently described in this
document. Particularly, there was a proposal to use this node for the
AFS parser too.
It can pose a (small) problem to try to differentiate the following
nodes:
// using binding as currently specified
partitions {
#address-cells = <x>;
#size-cells = <y>;
partition@0 {
...;
};
};
and
// proposed future binding
partitions {
compatible = "arm,arm-flash-structure";
};
It's especially difficult if other uses of this node start having
subnodes.
So, since the "partitions" node is new in v4.4, let's fixup the binding
before release so that it requires a compatible property, so it's much
clearer to distinguish. e.g.:
// proposed
partitions {
compatible = "fixed-partitions";
#address-cells = <x>;
#size-cells = <y>;
partition@0 {
...;
};
};
[1] Subject: "mtd: create a partition type device tree binding"
http://lkml.kernel.org/g/20151113220039.GA74382@google.comhttp://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-mtd/2015-November/063355.htmlhttp://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-mtd/2015-November/063364.html
Cc: Michal Suchanek <hramrach@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Brian Norris <computersforpeace@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>
e488ca9f8d