[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5811519.oHVuMujf0I@wuerfel>
Date: Sat, 06 Jul 2013 11:18 +0200
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To: Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@...e-electrons.com>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
Artem Bityutskiy <dedekind1@...il.com>,
Shawn Guo <shawn.guo@...aro.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
oliver@...inagl.nl, linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: MTD EEPROM support and driver integration
On Saturday 06 July 2013 10:28:04 Maxime Ripard wrote:
> > a) like interrupts, regs, dmas, clocks, pinctrl, reset, pwm: fixed property names
> >
> > regmap = <&at25 0xstart 0xlen>;
> > regmap-names = "mac-address";
> >
> > b) like gpio, regulator: variable property names
> >
> > mac-storage = <&at25 0xstart 0xlen>;
> >
> > It's unfortunate that we already have examples of both. They are largely
> > equivalent, but the tendency is towards the first.
>
> I don't have a strong feeling for one against another, so whatever works
> best. Both solutions will be a huge improvement anyway
>
> Just out of curiosity, is there any advantages besides having a fixed
> property name to the first solution?
I think it's mostly for consistency: trying to get most subsystems to
do it the same way to make it easier for people to write dts files.
A lesser point is that it simplifies the driver code if you don't
have to pass a name.
Arnd
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists