Re: st_fdma: Firmware filename in DT?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 




On Thu, Sep 03, 2015 at 04:45:35PM -0500, Rob Herring wrote:
> +devicetree-spec as a good question to separate from the fire hose.
> 
> On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 9:49 AM, Peter Griffin <peter.griffin@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Hi Rob, Pawel, Mark, Ian and Kumar,
> >
> > Quick question regarding this series here
> > https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/7/8/832. and the proposed
> > st,fw-name binding.
> 
> Thanks for looking at the bigger picture.
> 
> > What are the rules with putting firmware names into DT?
> 
> Whatever you can sneak in without DT maintainers noticing...
> 
> > Is it allowed?
> 
> They are already there as you have found, so yes. But should they be
> allowed? Possibly. I'm not saying no, but do have some concerns.

I think this is a genuine edge case.  A firmware name isn't strictly
speaking hardware description, but if the names exist in some "well
known" OS independent namespace, then it's a reasonable thing to be
specified in the device tree.

That said, I have some concerns on points, see later replies to the thread.

-- 
David Gibson			| I'll have my music baroque, and my code
david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au	| minimalist, thank you.  NOT _the_ _other_
				| _way_ _around_!
http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson

Attachment: pgpruWcxFlgjs.pgp
Description: PGP signature


[Index of Archives]     [Device Tree Compilter]     [Device Tree Spec]     [Linux Driver Backports]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux PCI Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]     [Yosemite Backpacking]
  Powered by Linux