[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4131759e-9474-48f6-cc05-67b6d4b6559b@linaro.org>
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2023 13:10:14 +0200
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
To: Frank Binns <Frank.Binns@...tec.com>,
"conor@...nel.org" <conor@...nel.org>,
Sarah Walker <Sarah.Walker@...tec.com>
Cc: "luben.tuikov@....com" <luben.tuikov@....com>,
"christian.koenig@....com" <christian.koenig@....com>,
"krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org"
<krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
"tzimmermann@...e.de" <tzimmermann@...e.de>,
"mripard@...nel.org" <mripard@...nel.org>,
"matthew.brost@...el.com" <matthew.brost@...el.com>,
"daniel@...ll.ch" <daniel@...ll.ch>,
"hns@...delico.com" <hns@...delico.com>,
"maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com"
<maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com>,
"boris.brezillon@...labora.com" <boris.brezillon@...labora.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org" <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
"afd@...com" <afd@...com>, "dakr@...hat.com" <dakr@...hat.com>,
"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
"robh+dt@...nel.org" <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
"airlied@...il.com" <airlied@...il.com>,
"conor+dt@...nel.org" <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
Donald Robson <Donald.Robson@...tec.com>,
"faith.ekstrand@...labora.com" <faith.ekstrand@...labora.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 02/17] dt-bindings: gpu: Add Imagination Technologies
PowerVR GPU
On 18/07/2023 13:08, Frank Binns wrote:
>> And this
>> items:
>> - const: gpu
>> can just be
>> const: gpu
>>
>> Although, if there is only one interrupt this is probably not
>> particularly helpful. Are there other implementations of this IP that
>> have more interrupts?
>
> No, all our current GPUs just have a single interrupt. I assume it's more future
> proof to keep the name in case that ever changes?
Why do you need name in the first place? If there is single entry, the
name is pointless, especially if it repeats the name of the IP block.
> As in, by having the name now
> we can make it a required property, which I guess we won't be able to do at some
> later point.
Why even making it required?
Best regards,
Krzysztof
Powered by blists - more mailing lists