[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <12dd20c6-da12-b3fb-7723-fefe7bbe5bbc@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2023 10:47:34 +0100
From: Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@...il.com>
To: Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>
Cc: Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@...aro.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>,
Michael Walle <michael@...le.cc>, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Rafał Miłecki <rafal@...ecki.pl>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: nvmem: layouts: add fixed-layout
On 9.03.2023 10:34, Rafał Miłecki wrote:
> With the introduction of NVMEM layouts I believe we should prefer and
> support describing all NVMEM devices content in the "nvmem-layout" node.
> Inluding fixed NVMEM cells (those with hardcoded offset & size).
>
> This seems to be cleaner design and more explicit.
>
> Introduce a binding allowing fixed NVMEM cells as a type of layout.
While this is obvious to me I should make it clear anyway:
We must not break backward compatibility. Old binding should remain
supported. We may want to deprecate old binding but we have to support
existing DT files.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists