On 06/25/2018 03:15 PM, Guenter Roeck wrote:
On 06/25/2018 05:52 AM, Alexandre Torgue wrote:
Hi Guenter,
But you are right I forgot to change stm32f429.dtsi.
If I add a commit for stm32f429.dtsi, it's Ok for you ?
Not really. You are imposing a personal preference on others,
and you would make stm32f429.dtsi inconsistent since it doesn't
use clock names for anything else.This in turn means that people
will have an endless source of irritation since they will need
a clock name for this node but not for others.
Why? This kind of implementation depends on each driver. Isn't ?
Or do you mean that if iwdg driver uses this implementation (clock
name usage) all nodes inside stm32f429.dtsi should follow the same
implementation ?
You will have to get the arm and DT maintainers to agree on this change.
As this patch makes easier integration of new platform, I agree with
Ludovic proposition.
Please provide a formal Acked-by:.
Sure
Acked-by: Alexandre TORGUE <alexandre.torgue@xxxxxx>
Ludovic, can you please resend a version by adding updates for
stm32f429.dtsi.
Thanks
Alex
Guenter
--
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
