On 08/09/2013 05:33 AM, Guenter Roeck wrote: > On 08/08/2013 01:40 PM, Stephen Warren wrote: >> On 08/08/2013 02:36 PM, Sergei Shtylyov wrote: >>> Hello. >>> >>> On 08/08/2013 10:56 AM, Wei Ni wrote: >>> >>>> Enable thermal sensor nct1008 for t114 dalmore. >>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Wei Ni <wni@xxxxxxxxxx> >>>> --- >>>> arch/arm/boot/dts/tegra114-dalmore.dts | 10 +++++++++- >>>> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >>> >>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/tegra114-dalmore.dts >>>> b/arch/arm/boot/dts/tegra114-dalmore.dts >>>> index b5a42f0..9d4d2b2 100644 >>>> --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/tegra114-dalmore.dts >>>> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/tegra114-dalmore.dts >>>> @@ -738,6 +738,14 @@ >>>> realtek,ldo1-en-gpios = >>>> <&gpio TEGRA_GPIO(V, 3) GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>; >>>> }; >>>> + >>>> + nct1008 { >>> >>> ePAPR [1] says: "the name of a node should be somewhat generic, >>> reflecting the function of the device and not its precise programming >>> model". So I suggest "thermal" >> >> True, although there's quite some precedent for node-names being the >> chip name for external chips in existing DTs. If we change this node >> name, I'd like to see a patch that makes all the other "nct1008" nodes >> match the new name... >> > > On the other side, one should not use a bad example as an argument or excuse > to make the same mistake again (though I keep hearing it all the time ... ). > I for my part tend to use something like temp-sensor or temp-sensor@1c. > Advantage of that kind of node name is that it auto-describes the node. Ok, so I will set the node name as "temp-sensor" And I will send out patches to change all other "nct1008" nodes. > > Guenter > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-tegra" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html