On 29.10.2015 20:43, Pavel Fedin wrote: > Hello! > >>>> Any vendor prefix here? How generic is this? >>> >>> I just don't know... Does *everything* really need a vendor prefix? How readable would that >> be? "compatible" property already says >>> that it's samsung-exynos-specific. And IMHO it's quite obvious that properties of vendor- >> specific device are automatically >>> vendor-specific. >>> Ok, i am currently fixing up the rest and will post v4 soon, and will Cc: it to devicetree >> ML. >> >> Which my reply you are referring to? You stripped part of some >> sentence and put it without *any context*. Just random sentence. >> I asked for vendor prefix in few places... srom-timing? width? And I >> do not remember where I used exactly these words. > > Ok, sorry, i promise to improve. :) > Anyway, i have figured out how to add sub-devices, and heavily modified the whole thing. And indeed, vendor prefix is now very useful, so i added it to all three properties. Making v4... Actually now I found: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/gpmc-eth.txt Aren't you duplicating this work? This looks very, very similar. Best regards, Krzysztof -- 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
 |