On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 10:04:23AM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote: > On 04/15/2016 03:17 AM, Linus Walleij wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 5:16 PM, Stephen Warren <swarren@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On 04/14/2016 06:42 AM, Linus Walleij wrote: > > > > On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 7:46 PM, Stephen Warren <swarren@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > I suspect that the Tegra definition of a "port" is close to what other > > > > people > > > > call a "bank" like I try to define in this patch? > > > > http://marc.info/?l=linux-gpio&m=145941547420164&w=2 > > > > > > There are similarities, but the concepts are quite different. In that > > > thread, the term "bank" actually refers to an instance of a standalone HW IP > > > block. Here, "port" is definitely something internal to a single HW block. > > > > OK I get it. I wonder if we can make that common terminology as well. > > > > GPIO bank := unique instance of a common IP block > > GPIO port := unique line range inside an IP block > > I think this would be hard, and in some places potentially confusing. > > Various HW documentation likely uses the terms bank and port, without regard > to how those terms are used in documentation for other chips. I'd like the > binding for any particular chip to use the same terminology as the HW > documentation for that chip, even if it's inconsistent with other bindings > (or at least contain an explicit terminology translation table). That's > because the binding is intended as HW documentation. > > Within the Linux code, we could certainly attempt to use consistent > terminology. If so, I suggest we use terms that are quite unlikely to be > used by any HW documentation, or could only realistically be used to mean > the same thing. If we decided to use "GPIO bank" and "GPIO port" as you > defined above, yet some HW documentation already used "GPIO bank" to mean a > subset of GPIOs within a single IP block, and "GPIO port" to mean a single > GPIO (both of which I think are quite likely/possible), then that's going to > make matters worse not better. > > Perhaps "HW module"m "IP block" or perhaps "device" would be a reasonable > term for "GPIO bank" as you defined that above. Of course, bikeshedding:-) > > I'm not sure of a reasonable term for "GPIO port" as you defined it. > > ... > > It's cool. > > Acked-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > I assume you want to merge this through the Tegra tree, or > > should I apply it to the GPIO tree? > > I'm happy either way. If through the Tegra tree, Thierry would be applying > it so I'll let him make the call. > > I suspect that both this patch and my earlier "ARM: tegra: fix naming in > GPIO DT binding header" should be applied through the same tree for > consistency. Applied (to the same tree as that other patch), thanks. Thierry
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
