On 14:37-20200917, Peter Rosin wrote: [...] > >>> Should not the defines start with J7200_WIZ? SERDES0 seems like a too > >>> generic prefix, at least to me. > >> > >> Thanks, good point. I am not sure if WIZ should even be used.. It is > >> a TI internal prefix for various serdes solutions, but I agree that > >> SERDES0 is too generic a terminology. That said, we should cleanup > >> include/dt-bindings/mux/mux-j721e-wiz.h as well, prior to introducing > >> j7200 changes. > >> > > > > I'm planning to put all TI SERDES definitions in one header file "ti-serdes-mux.h" > > and add SOC specific prefixes to the macros. > > > > This will mean some churn in the existing DT files. (only 2 so far) > > > > Are you guys OK if I do the change in one patch to avoid a broken build in between. > > You guys can then decide whose tree it goes through. > > > > The new SoC addition will be separate of course. > > We should get these changes done before 5.9 is released. OK. > Not breaking the build for each intermediate step is always a priority. > Also, renaming mux-j721e-wiz.h to ti-serdes-mux.h and renaming the macros > could be seen as orthogonal, and it is certainly possible to do that > as two patches without breaking the build in between. It would just need > changes on both sides of the interface in both patches. But I wouldn't > worry about separating this into two patches, just do a rename patch and > be done with it. Then follow up with additions for j7200. > > However, now that we are renaming things anyway, do we really need "mux" > in the name of the file itself? > I personally find .../dt-dbindings/mux/ti-serdes.h descriptive enough. yep, OK with me. -- Regards, Nishanth Menon Key (0xDDB5849D1736249D) / Fingerprint: F8A2 8693 54EB 8232 17A3 1A34 DDB5 849D 1736 249D
