On Mon, 2023-01-16 at 10:17 +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 16/01/2023 10:14, Moudy Ho (何宗原) wrote:
> > > > + mdp3-fg0@14002000 {
> > >
> > > Node names should be generic.
> > >
> >
> >
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://devicetree-specification.readthedocs.io/en/latest/chapter2-devicetree-basics.html*generic-names-recommendation__;Iw!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!gmuIIk9pHTEGcVTtOXNeP3a8XUucoiTd5vTmxNK8lCHtytRDc3R8Eh44WOWNEUkJlv_pPCtg_DvPCHsCHNscg6_0cfJe$
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > "0" suffix is definitely nothing generic. Drop such suffixes
> > > everywhere.
> > > Drop also "mdp3" prefix everywhere.
> > >
> > >
> > > Best regards,
> > > Krzysztof
> > >
> >
> > Hi Krzysztof,
> >
> > May I uniformly name all MediaTek's media data path ver.3(MDP3)
> > nodes
> > as "mdp3@xxx"?
>
> No, because it does not describe generic class of a device. Some
> nodes
> are probably quite specific, thus we do not have generic names for
> them,
> but then any prefixes are also not neeeded. If node is image-scaler,
> it
> is just image-scaler, not "mdp3-image-scaler". If node is video-codec
> it
> is not mdp3-video-codec. etc.
>
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof
Hi Krzysztof,
Appreciate for the explanation, refer to the generic names in the link
you mentioned, could I use "display" instead?
Regards,
Moudy
