On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 06:26:02PM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote: > On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 05:40:11PM +0100, Nicolin Chen wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 12:59:43PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote: > > > On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 12:06:01PM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote: > > > > On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 08:12:12AM +0100, Xiubo Li wrote: > > > > > > > > The 'big-endian-data' property is originally used to indicate whether the > > > > > LSB firstly or MSB firstly will be transmitted to the CODEC or received > > > > > from the CODEC, and there has nothing relation to the memory data. > > > > > > > Both Nicolin [1] and Mark [2] asked for the old property to be kept > > > > around for compatibility reasons. Those requests seem to have been > > > > ignored entirely; the commit message doesn't even describe why you > > > > believe removing support for the old property is safe. > > > > > > The response was that the relevant chips aren't out in the wild so it's > > > vanishingly unlikely that anyone would have a real DT with this option > > > enabled. I'll defer to Nicolin on if that's the case or not. > > > > Yea, it sounds like so. I thought Vf610 also used this property. But if > > only LS1 using it, I think we may consent this rename right? > > If you two are happy, then fine by me. My only concern was that the > rationale for this being safe wasn't in the commit message. Agreed, it's better to be described in the commit comments as well. And regarding the compatibility with the old DT, I personally prefer it to be added in the change for safety but if this case is allowable which I'm not so sure about it, I'm fairly okay with the rename. Nicolin -- 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
