[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <bebf1cf679014e62b1f4ad3fa970b52f@BY2PR03MB505.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2014 07:04:00 +0000
From: "Li.Xiubo@...escale.com" <Li.Xiubo@...escale.com>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
CC: "linux-doc@...r.kernel.org" <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCHv2 2/3] regmap: Add the DT binding documentation for
endianness
> Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 2/3] regmap: Add the DT binding documentation for
> endianness
>
> On Wed, Apr 02, 2014 at 06:09:08PM +0800, Xiubo Li wrote:
>
> > +sai2: sai@...31000 {
> > + compatible = "fsl,vf610-sai";
> > + reg = <0x40031000 0x1000>;
> > + ...
> > + val-endian = 'LE';
> > +};
>
> This is mostly OK as a binding (though it should be CCed to the DT list
> and maintiners as all DT bindings should) except using upper case
> doesn't really seem idiomatic for DT - lower case is more normal -
I will your advices.
> and I
> don't think we can make these properties mandatory in themselves.
> Individual bindings would need to make them mandatory. It's also odd to
> have a mandatory property which may be absent!
Well, yes, It is.
The absent one is just to compatible with the old drivers.
>
> It'd probably be better if the binding defined what the default
> endianess was too, or just didn't say what happens in cases where
> nothing is specified, the latter seems better.
I will think it over carefully.
> Generally just not
> mentioning regmap is better for a binding definition, the binding should
> be usable by all OSs and not just Linux.
How about move the endianness OF parsing to the driver/of/ ?
Is this will be better ?
Thanks,
BRs
Xiubo
--
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