[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <635b89d0-e5e8-44b7-a243-c75fea896a8f@linaro.org>
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2024 09:25:17 +0200
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
To: Nikolaos Pasaloukos <nikolaos.pasaloukos@...ize.com>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Cc: James Cowgill <james.cowgill@...ize.com>,
Matt Redfearn <matthew.redfearn@...ize.com>,
Neil Jones <neil.jones@...ize.com>,
Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>, Stephen Boyd
<sboyd@...nel.org>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
"linux-clk@...r.kernel.org" <linux-clk@...r.kernel.org>,
"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/7] dt-bindings: clock: Add binding constants for
BLZP1600
On 25/04/2024 09:18, Nikolaos Pasaloukos wrote:
>>
>> Let me rephrase the question: Why you do not have headers for interrupt
>> numbers? All addresses? GPIO pin numbers?
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Krzysztof
>>
> Thank you very much for your feedback Krzysztof, I'll prepare a v3 with proper
> threading this time, removing the dt-bindings for the clock & reset.
BTW, this is purely about bindings. I don't oppose DTS headers to avoid
certain magic numbers, like we do for several platforms already.
Best regards,
Krzysztof
Powered by blists - more mailing lists