[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5137342.oSWmFr9Y8D@wuerfel>
Date: Thu, 01 Sep 2016 13:17:13 +0200
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@...sung.com>
Cc: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@...sung.com>,
Tomasz Figa <tomasz.figa@...il.com>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>,
Sylwester Nawrocki <s.nawrocki@...sung.com>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
Kukjin Kim <kgene@...nel.org>, javier@....samsung.com,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/6] ARM: dts: s3c2416: Use macros for pinctrl configuration
On Thursday, September 1, 2016 1:12:18 PM CEST Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> >
> > Shouldn't macros that are also used by s3c* be named as
> > SAMSUNG_PIN_FUNC_2 etc. (s3c* SoCs are not Exynos)?
>
> Right, this is the inconsistency. The problem with "samsung" prefix is
> that there is no guarantee it will be like that for newer SoCs. How
> about one of:
> 1. using the oldest prefix (S3C24XX in this case),
> 2. duplicating them per SoC family (so S3C24XX, S3C64XX, EXYNOS).
> ?
I'd suggest living with the inconsistency and using EXYNOS as the prefix,
as that is the most common one these days, even if the other ones
predate it.
Arnd
Powered by blists - more mailing lists