On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 01:31:31PM +0200, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > Hi David, > > On Friday 23 August 2013 12:11:11 David Gibson wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 02:46:40PM +0900, Simon Horman wrote: > > > Hi Laurent, Hi Guennadi, Hi All, > > > > > > Olof has brought to my attention that there is some inconsistency > > > in the way that compatibility strings for SHMobile are named and he > > > has asked us to clean things up for v3.12. > > > > > > Looking through arch/arm/boot/dts/ I see that we have: > > > > > > 1. {gpio,pfc}-r8aXXXX and; > > > 2. r8aXXXX-sdhi > > > > > > The inconsistency that Olof has asked us to resolve is that we > > > should either use r8aXXXX- or -r8aXXXX. Not both. > > > > > > It seems to me that neither option is inherently better than the other > > > so we should just choose the path of least resistance to make things > > > consistent. > > > > > > Laurent, Guennadi, do you have any opinions on if it would > > > be easier to change the GPIO and PFC compatibility strings; > > > or to change the SDHI compatibility strings? > > > > > > Ideally I would like you to come to some sort of consensus and send > > > patches. > > > > So, by all means clean this up in the dts. > > > > BUT, in keeping with the recent discussions on improving the DT > > process, the corresponding drivers must continue to recognize both > > forms, so that old DTs will still work correctly. > > Given the early state of DT support in arm/mach-shmobile, I'm pretty sure we > have no DT-based systems in the wild. The old compatibility string could in my > opinion just be dropped. Hm, well, ok. Just remember to always err on the side of broad compatiblity. We've become sloppy with incompatible DT updates and its caused us a bunch of grief. -- David Gibson | I'll have my music baroque, and my code david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au | minimalist, thank you. NOT _the_ _other_ | _way_ _around_! http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson
Attachment:
pgpziOYSsZdWc.pgp
Description: PGP signature