[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <af797d43-f1f8-6ef9-4570-5c048aac9733@linaro.org>
Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2022 21:06:50 +0200
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
To: kris@...eddedTS.com, Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>
Cc: Shawn Guo <shawnguo@...nel.org>,
Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>,
Pengutronix Kernel Team <kernel@...gutronix.de>,
Fabio Estevam <festevam@...il.com>,
NXP Linux Team <linux-imx@....com>,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Mark Featherston <mark@...eddedTS.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2] ARM: dts: Add TS-7553-V2 support
On 19/07/2022 19:39, Kris Bahnsen wrote:
>
> e.g. looking at commits of imx6ul-*
> "ARM: dts:" is used for a number of initial devicetree commits
> "ARM: dts: imx6ul: <board>:" is used a few times
> "ARM: dts: imx6ul-<board>:" is also used a few times
>
> For initial commits of a devicetree, or modifications of a devicetree,
> what is the preferred pattern moving forward?
The last two, although also these appear:
ARM: dts: imx:
ARM: dts: fsl:
I don't have a clear answer which is the best, but the point is to have
proper subarch prefix.
Best regards,
Krzysztof
Powered by blists - more mailing lists