On 12-05-15, 11:04, Nishanth Menon wrote: > Just curious -> is'nt it better to just have min<->max range? binding > as it stands right now is open to interpretation as to what will be > attempted and in what sequence? with a valid min, target or max - > is'nt it more power efficient always to go for a "min" than a target? > > Further, min<->max implies anywhere in that range and is more > consistent with "regulator like" description. It came out after some discussions on the list, you may want to go through that. https://lists.linaro.org/pipermail/linaro-kernel/2015-January/019844.html > True. one option might be to allow for vendor specific property > extensions - that will let vendors add in additional quirky data > custom to their SoCs as needed. Yeah, I am planning to support them. -- viresh -- 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
