[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <d92ec883-09ae-271f-69dd-156df17c3e98@roeck-us.net>
Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2018 06:15:35 -0700
From: Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
To: Alexandre Torgue <alexandre.torgue@...com>,
Ludovic BARRE <ludovic.barre@...com>
Cc: Wim Van Sebroeck <wim@...ux-watchdog.org>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Maxime Coquelin <mcoquelin.stm32@...il.com>,
linux-watchdog@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V4 2/4] watchdog: stm32: add pclk feature for stm32mp1
On 06/25/2018 05:52 AM, Alexandre Torgue wrote:
> Hi Guenter,
>
>
>>> But you are right I forgot to change stm32f429.dtsi.
>>> If I add a commit for stm32f429.dtsi, it's Ok for you ?
>>>
>>
>> Not really. You are imposing a personal preference on others,
>> and you would make stm32f429.dtsi inconsistent since it doesn't
>> use clock names for anything else.This in turn means that people
>> will have an endless source of irritation since they will need
>> a clock name for this node but not for others.
>
> Why? This kind of implementation depends on each driver. Isn't ?
>
> Or do you mean that if iwdg driver uses this implementation (clock name usage) all nodes inside stm32f429.dtsi should follow the same implementation ?
>
>>
>> You will have to get the arm and DT maintainers to agree on this change.
>
> As this patch makes easier integration of new platform, I agree with Ludovic proposition.
>
Please provide a formal Acked-by:.
Guenter
Powered by blists - more mailing lists