[...] >> >Why does this have to change the semantics of the DT binding? >> > >> >> I'm thinking that maybe in the late fulture, this device will be >> applied to some PowerPC SoC, from the regmap framework code, we can >> see that the 'big-endian' property could be ignored. >> >> So,in this case, if it is absent, the default endian mode should be >> used as defualt or native as the regmap framework said. > > As I have mentioned in the past w.r.t. endianness bindings, there is no > such thing as a "default endianness" or "native endianness". > > PowerPC and ARM can be Bi-endian, configured by the kernel. > > The hardware's registers have a fixed endianness regardless of this > runtime configuration. > > So describe that fixed property, as that does not vary with kernel > configuration (and is therefore a property of the HW rather than the > combination of HW + kernel). > Yeah, okay. I'll remove the document binding's modification. > Thanks, > Mark. -- 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
