On 3/24/2017 9:35 AM, Shawn Guo wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 07:17:50AM +0000, Horia Geantă wrote:
>>>> + sec_mon: sec_mon@1e90000 {
>>>
>>> Hyphen is more preferred to be used in node name than underscore.
>>>
>> This would imply changing the
>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/crypto/fsl-sec4.txt binding and
>> dealing with all the consequences, which IIUC is probably not worth.
>
> I do not care the bindings doc that much, since I'm not the maintainer
> of it. What are the consequences specifically, if we use a better node
> name in dts than bindings example?
>
Users relying on finding the sec_mon node will obviously stop working.
I don't see any in-kernel users, however there could be others I am not
aware of and DT bindings should provide for backwards compatibility.
I could deprecate "sec_mon" in the bindings and suggest "sec-mon"
instead, while leaving all existing dts files as-is.
The risk is breaking LS1012A users relying on "sec_mon".
I see that ePAPR:
-allows both for hyphen and underline in case of node names
-allows only for hyphen (i.e. forbids underline) in case of alias nodes
In the first case, I understand there's an (undocumented?) agreement to
prefer hyphen over underline.
For the 2nd one, does this mean I should change alias names?
Thanks,
Horia
