Hi, On 22/12/2015 at 12:16:41 -0600, Rob Herring wrote : > Well, the binding should reflect that, whether the driver needs to be > re-written is somewhat a separate question. That should probably have > been done for the DS1302 driver originally and it is not too fair for > the 2nd person to fix it. You could just have a single driver bound to > the controller node which is aware of the DS1302 being the slave > device (ignoring that part of the DT for now). > I agree with Rob here. I won't require that you fix the driver but it would be better to have a proper DT binding from the beginning so that when the driver is fixed it will still work with the previous device trees. -- Alexandre Belloni, Free Electrons Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering http://free-electrons.com -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
