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. >>> >>> 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. Best regards, Krzysztof
