On 26/12/2023 09:36, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 26/12/2023 02:50, Jinlong Mao wrote: >> >> >> On 12/21/2023 4:44 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>> On 21/12/2023 09:36, Jinlong Mao wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> On 12/21/2023 4:17 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>>>> On 21/12/2023 09:15, Jinlong Mao wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On 12/21/2023 4:12 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>>>>>> On 21/12/2023 04:28, Jinlong Mao wrote: >>>>>>>>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arm,embedded-trace-extension.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arm,embedded-trace-extension.yaml >>>>>>>>>> index f725e6940993..cbf583d34029 100644 >>>>>>>>>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arm,embedded-trace-extension.yaml >>>>>>>>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arm,embedded-trace-extension.yaml >>>>>>>>>> @@ -23,7 +23,7 @@ description: | >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> properties: >>>>>>>>>> $nodename: >>>>>>>>>> - pattern: "^ete([0-9a-f]+)$" >>>>>>>>>> + pattern: "^ete-([0-9a-f]+)$" >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> My concerns are not resolved. Why is it here in the first place? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hi Krzysztof, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> ETE is acronym of embedded trace extension. The number of the name is >>>>>>>> the same as the number of the CPU it belongs to. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> This is obvious and was not my question. > > You already said it here... > >>>>>> >>>>>> Do you mean why the pattern match of the node name is added here ? >>>>> >>>>> Yes, especially that it is requiring a non-generic name. >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> This node should not have the node name match, right ? >>>>> >>>>> Usually. For sure shouldn't be for non-generic names. >>>>> >>>> Hi Suzuki, >>>> >>>> Can we remove the pattern match of the node name and use a generic name >>>> "ete" for the ete DT nodes ? >>> >>> "ete" is not a generic name. What is generic here? It's an acronym of >>> some specific device name. >>> >> >> The device full name is embedded trace extension. So use ETE as the name >> here. > > That's obvious and my comment was not about it. Second time... This is > my unlucky day... I said, why do you even want to enforce name which is > not generic, since the names should be generic? > I think we can just drop the enforced name if it's getting in the way. It doesn't really do anything and other Coresight bindings don't have it anyway. > I assume you read the DT specification: > https://devicetree-specification.readthedocs.io/en/latest/chapter2-devicetree-basics.html#generic-names-recommendation > > > Best regards, > Krzysztof > I couldn't find anything in that list that would be a good fit for a name, and it seems like all of the Coresight devices have already been added with non generic names (like funnel and replicator etc), so it might be a bit late now. But if we drop the enforced name then it's probably fine. James
