[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190612060522.GB11086@dragon>
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2019 14:05:29 +0800
From: Shawn Guo <shawnguo@...nel.org>
To: Aisheng Dong <aisheng.dong@....com>
Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
Anson Huang <anson.huang@....com>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Fabio Estevam <festevam@...il.com>,
Stefan Agner <stefan@...er.ch>,
Sascha Hauer <kernel@...gutronix.de>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@...tlin.com>,
Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>,
Simon Horman <horms+renesas@...ge.net.au>,
Jagan Teki <jagan@...rulasolutions.com>,
Leonard Crestez <leonard.crestez@....com>,
Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>,
Dinh Nguyen <dinguyen@...nel.org>,
Enric Balletbo i Serra <enric.balletbo@...labora.com>,
"open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
"open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS"
<devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
dl-linux-imx <linux-imx@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] dt-bindings: imx: Add pinctrl binding doc for i.MX8MN
On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 10:00:36AM +0000, Aisheng Dong wrote:
> > From: Linus Walleij [mailto:linus.walleij@...aro.org]
> > Sent: Saturday, June 8, 2019 5:04 AM
> >
> > On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 5:04 AM <Anson.Huang@....com> wrote:
> >
> > > From: Anson Huang <Anson.Huang@....com>
> > >
> > > Add binding doc for i.MX8MN pinctrl driver.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Anson Huang <Anson.Huang@....com>
> >
> > Looks mostly OK to me, but I'd like the maintainers to review, so Dong et al
> > please look at this!
> >
> > > +Required properties:
> > > +- compatible: "fsl,imx8mn-iomuxc"
> >
> > So should this not be "nxp,imx8mn-iomuxc"
> > or "nxp,freescale-imx8mn-iomuxc" or something these days? The vendor name
> > is nxp is it not.
> >
> > I was complaining to the DT maintainers at one point that these companies
> > seem to buy each other left and right so this vendor nomenclature is dubious,
> > but I guess at least it should reflect the vendor that produced the chip or
> > something.
> >
> > If everyone is happy with "fsl,*" I will not complain though.
> > (i.e. if the maintainers ACK it.)
>
> We preferred to keep "fsl,*" for Freescale i.MX product line according to last discussion.
> And we already did this way for most i.MX devices.
+1
We do not see serious problem with 'fsl' prefix, so would rather stay
with it.
Shawn
Powered by blists - more mailing lists