Hi Geert, On 30 May 2018 14:37 Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 3:30 PM, Phil Edworthy wrote: > > On 25 May 2018 10:13 Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > > [snip] > > > >> Now, given the clock definitions for RZ/N1[DSL] are the same > >> (although some don't exist on some variants), you could keep on using > >> RZN1_CLK_FOO for the names of the defines, and store them in a > common > >> file, included by the soc-specific file. But please make clear the > >> common file cannot be included directly, so the filename does not > >> become part of the DT ABI, and you are shielded from future marketing > >> silliness (e.g. next quarter's RZ/N1X being totally different). > > How does an include filename become part of the DT ABI? > > I thought the dtb is the ABI, not the dts. Am I wrong? > > You're right. In se the DT ABI applies to the DTB, not to the DTS. > > The definitions inside the include file are part of the DT bindings, and thus > cannot be changed. Your DTS files get these definitions by including the > header file, so the header filename is also part of the bindings, and thus can't > be changed that easily. That seems a bit onerous... It makes sense that bindings that affect the dtb can only be added to, so that an old dtb still works. However, I would have thought it's the value of the constant that is the ABI, not the symbol name used to specify it. Thanks for you feedback! Phil
