On Tuesday 10 March 2015 16:44:24 Maxime Coquelin wrote: > 2015-03-10 16:02 GMT+01:00 Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx>: > > On Friday 20 February 2015 19:01:06 Maxime Coquelin wrote: > >> +/* AHB1 */ > >> +#define GPIOA_RESET 0 > >> +#define GPIOB_RESET 1 > >> +#define GPIOC_RESET 2 > >> +#define GPIOD_RESET 3 > >> +#define GPIOE_RESET 4 > >> +#define GPIOF_RESET 5 > >> +#define GPIOG_RESET 6 > >> +#define GPIOH_RESET 7 > >> +#define GPIOI_RESET 8 > >> +#define GPIOJ_RESET 9 > >> +#define GPIOK_RESET 10 > >> > > > > As these are just the hardware numbers, it's better to not make them > > part of the binding at all. Instead, just document in the binding that > > one is supposed to pass the hardware number as the argument. > > The reset controller is part of the RCC (Reset & Clock Controller) IP. > In this version, I only provided the reset registers to the reset > controller driver, but as per Andreas Färber remark, I should avec a > single DT node for both the resets and clocks. > > In the next version I am preparing, the defines doesn't look as > trivial as in this version, GPIOA_RESET being 128 for instance. > > Is it fine for you if I keep the defines part of the binding? > > It's always better to avoid these files entirely, as they are a frequent source of merge dependencies, and they make it less obvious what's going on than having binary values in the dtb that make sense. Arnd -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arch" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
