On 31/05/17 18:08, Rob Herring wrote: > On Thu, May 25, 2017 at 02:23:44PM +0100, Sudeep Holla wrote: >> >> >> On 25/05/17 14:22, Jassi Brar wrote: [...] >>> Every MHU controller can by driven as "arm,mhu-doorbell" or "arm,mhu" >>> equally fine. So you are basically smuggling a s/w feature into DT. >>> >> >> I disagree, the spec clearly says each bit can be used for different >> event and hence we need a way to specify that in DT when used as doorbell. > > I think the point is that you should not continue to use both. The > single cell usage should be deprecated. Maybe you'll have to encode the > 2nd cell when not used as 0 means bit 0? > Instead of having special encoding, I like your below suggestion on using #mbox-cells to distinguish the usage modes. > Arguably, you don't even need a new compatible. #mbox-cells tells you > whether to use the old or new binding. I'm fine either way though. > Ah good point, yes we can distinguish with #mbox-cells. I will drop the new compatible. -- Regards, Sudeep -- 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
