linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] dt-bindings: display: add Amlogic Meson DRM Bindings

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Wed, 30 Nov 2016 17:22:02 +0100
From:   Neil Armstrong <narmstrong@...libre.com>
To:     Kevin Hilman <khilman@...libre.com>
Cc:     Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>,
        airlied@...ux.ie, carlo@...one.org,
        dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, linux-amlogic@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        victor.wan@...ogic.com, jerry.cao@...ogic.com, Xing.Xu@...ogic.com,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, daniel@...ll.ch
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] dt-bindings: display: add Amlogic Meson DRM
 Bindings

On 11/30/2016 05:21 PM, Kevin Hilman wrote:
> Neil Armstrong <narmstrong@...libre.com> writes:
> 
>> Hi Laurent,
>> On 11/30/2016 04:58 PM, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
>>> Hi Neil,
>>>
>>> On Wednesday 30 Nov 2016 16:43:44 Neil Armstrong wrote:
>>>> Signed-off-by: Neil Armstrong <narmstrong@...libre.com>
>>>> ---
>>>>  .../bindings/display/meson/meson-drm.txt           | 101 ++++++++++++++++++
>>>
>>> I forgot to mention that the file should not be named meson-drm.txt as DRM is 
>>> a Linux-specific concept. You can name it meson.txt, but a better option would 
>>> be amlogic,meson.txt. By the way does it really need a subdirectory ?
>>
>> I took example of the sun4i layout the naming, and no it does not need a subdirector..
>>
>> I will move it to amlogic,meson.txt, seems far better.
>>
> 
> To me, amlogic,meson is redundant.  Probably should be amlogic,vpu.txt?
> 
> Kevin
> 

Yes, seems more coherent.

Thanks,
Neil