linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/4] dt-bindings: counter: new bindings for TI eQEP

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

Message-ID: <CAL_JsqLA+m5vKZQ1WwWusnVHwX+nnuApiwKXUnmP6ti-PvMZ-g@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 2 Aug 2019 07:34:42 -0600
From:   Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>
To:     William Breathitt Gray <vilhelm.gray@...il.com>
Cc:     David Lechner <david@...hnology.com>,
        "open list:IIO SUBSYSTEM AND DRIVERS" <linux-iio@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-omap <linux-omap@...r.kernel.org>,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...23.retrosnub.co.uk>,
        Benoît Cousson <bcousson@...libre.com>,
        Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>,
        Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux PWM List <linux-pwm@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] dt-bindings: counter: new bindings for TI eQEP

On Fri, Aug 2, 2019 at 1:25 AM William Breathitt Gray
<vilhelm.gray@...il.com> wrote:
>
> On Sat, Jul 27, 2019 at 08:48:36PM +0100, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> > On Mon, 22 Jul 2019 10:45:35 -0500
> > David Lechner <david@...hnology.com> wrote:
> >
> > > This documents device tree binding for the Texas Instruments Enhanced
> > > Quadrature Encoder Pulse (eQEP) Module found in various TI SoCs.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: David Lechner <david@...hnology.com>
> >
> > Up to William given it is a counter binding, (unless Rob overrules)
> > but new bindings are generally preferred as yaml.
> >
> > Content looks fine to me.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Jonathan
>
> Rob,
>
> Would you prefer these bindings as yaml, or shall I accept them as they
> are now?

Still up to you at this point, but I certainly prefer them to be DT schema.

Rob