[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <201405242143.42693.marex@denx.de>
Date: Sat, 24 May 2014 21:43:42 +0200
From: Marek Vasut <marex@...x.de>
To: Tomasz Figa <tomasz.figa@...il.com>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, mark.rutland@....com,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux@....linux.org.uk,
herbert@...dor.apana.org.au, pawel.moll@....com,
ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk, rdunlap@...radead.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, robh+dt@...nel.org,
LABBE Corentin <clabbe.montjoie@...il.com>,
linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org, galak@...eaurora.org,
grant.likely@...aro.org, maxime.ripard@...e-electrons.com,
davem@...emloft.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] dt: Add DT bindings documentation for SUNXI Security System
On Saturday, May 24, 2014 at 09:20:03 PM, Tomasz Figa wrote:
> Hi Marek,
>
> On 24.05.2014 13:21, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > On Thursday, May 22, 2014 at 05:09:54 PM, LABBE Corentin wrote:
> >
> > Missing commit message. Please fix this and send a V2.
> >
> >> Signed-off-by: LABBE Corentin <clabbe.montjoie@...il.com>
> >> ---
> >>
> >> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/crypto/sunxi-ss.txt | 9 +++++++++
> >> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+)
> >> create mode 100644
> >> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/crypto/sunxi-ss.txt
> >>
> >> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/crypto/sunxi-ss.txt
> >> b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/crypto/sunxi-ss.txt new file mode
> >> 100644
> >> index 0000000..356563b
> >> --- /dev/null
> >> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/crypto/sunxi-ss.txt
> >> @@ -0,0 +1,9 @@
> >> +* Allwinner Security System found on A20 SoC
> >> +
> >> +Required properties:
> >> +- compatible : Should be "allwinner,sun7i-a20-crypto".
> >
> > Why sun7i-a20 ? Is the crypto unit different in other sunxi chips ? Can
> > that not be described by DT props ?
>
> A widely used convention is to define compatible strings after first
> SoCs on which particular IP blocks appear. It is quite common among IP
> blocks for which there is no well defined versioning scheme.
Well yeah, that's fine. But in this case, "sun7i" is the entire group of CPUs
manufactured by AW. I find that information redundant, the "allwinner,a20-
crypto" would suffice. But I wonder if that IP block might have appeared even
earlier ? Or if it is CPU family specific, thus "allwinner,sun7i-crypto" would
be a better string ?
Best regards,
Marek Vasut
--
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