[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1479315682.2534.20.camel@synopsys.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2016 17:01:23 +0000
From: Eugeniy Paltsev <Eugeniy.Paltsev@...opsys.com>
To: "andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com"
<andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
CC: "vinod.koul@...el.com" <vinod.koul@...el.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"robh+dt@...nel.org" <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
"Eugeniy.Paltsev@...opsys.com" <Eugeniy.Paltsev@...opsys.com>,
"linux-snps-arc@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-snps-arc@...ts.infradead.org>,
"mark.rutland@....com" <mark.rutland@....com>,
"dmaengine@...r.kernel.org" <dmaengine@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] Update device tree Synopsys DW DMAC documentation
Hi Andy,
On Wed, 2016-11-16 at 17:10 +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> Overall, since we are going to expose some properties to the Device
> Tree
> I would really think twice about naming. Better if we reuse something
> existing already.
>
> So, what I can see is
>
> dmacap,private
> dmacap,memcpy
>
> Here is a selling point as well, i.e. standardization.
>
As I can see these property name used only in "mv_xor" driver. And
they are marked as deprecated.
So, I'm not sure if I should used these names.
I agree with other comments.
--
Paltsev Eugeniy
Powered by blists - more mailing lists