Olof Johansson wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 2, 2013 at 4:20 PM, Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@xxxxxxxxxxx> > wrote: > > Fix the incorrect compatible property value of pinctrl for EXYNOS4 SoCs. > > Ah, this answers my question from the previous patch. So, why do 5450 > as a separate patch? > OK, let me create one patch to fix it :-) > > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/samsung-pinctrl.txt > b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/samsung-pinctrl.txt > > index e97a278..4598a47 100644 > > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/samsung-pinctrl.txt > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/samsung-pinctrl.txt > > @@ -7,9 +7,9 @@ on-chip controllers onto these pads. > > > > Required Properties: > > - compatible: should be one of the following. > > - - "samsung,pinctrl-exynos4210": for Exynos4210 compatible pin- > controller. > > - - "samsung,pinctrl-exynos4x12": for Exynos4x12 compatible pin- > controller. > > - - "samsung,pinctrl-exynos5250": for Exynos5250 compatible pin- > controller. > > + - "samsung,exynos4210-pinctrl": for Exynos4210 compatible pin- > controller. > > + - "samsung,exynos4x12-pinctrl": for Exynos4x12 compatible pin- > controller. > > + - "samsung,exynos5250-pinctrl": for Exynos5250 compatible pin- > controller. > > Do we care about backwards compatibility for ARM device trees yet? > It's becoming time to start caring soon, if we don't. So while this > might be OK for this time around, we should start requiring some > backwards compatibility for bindings that have been used in at least > one released kernel. > Agree, let me check again. > Once we do care, then you can update the dts/dtsi files, but you'll > need to keep both the old and the new bindings in the C file below. > OK, I see. Thanks. [...] - Kukjin -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
 |