On Thursday 20 March 2014 21:39:56 Jassi Brar wrote: > On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 11:16 PM, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Monday 17 March 2014, Jassi Brar wrote: > > >> Perhaps the mailbox controller driver should name its links as it > >> wants. By how the remote works with the mailbox links, the client > >> driver asks for a specific mailbox link (which maybe a hardcoded > >> string in the driver or be gotten alongside other data via client's > >> DT) ? > > > > I don't see why we should do it any different from the other bindings. > > Let's just stick with mboxes/mbox-names or mailboxes/mailbox-names > > if you prefer. > > > >> IOW we can't have a generic API/DT-bindings that could get us > >> reusable client drivers. But only common framework/code that would > >> otherwise be duplicated by every platform. > > > > That is a major benefit though. > > Also even if most drivers won't work across multiple platforms, there > > is still a reasonable chance that /some/ drivers will. > > > It seems those /some/ drivers will have to work with everything same > but the channel name (which the client could get from its DT node when > the second platform appears). Why would you ever have varying channel names? I would expect that the name is always fixed in the binding of the client driver, like we do for clocks or interrupts for instance. Arnd -- 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
