From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Grant Likely Subject: Re: [PATCH] of: Add a reg-names property to name reg entries Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2011 06:49:27 +0200 Message-ID: <20111025044927.GA798@ponder.secretlab.ca> References: <1319471697-8970-1-git-send-email-b-cousson@ti.com> <20111024221916.GF4394@ponder.secretlab.ca> <4EA5ED35.7000806@ti.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from mail-fx0-f46.google.com ([209.85.161.46]:61074 "EHLO mail-fx0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751313Ab1JYEtg (ORCPT ); Tue, 25 Oct 2011 00:49:36 -0400 Received: by faan17 with SMTP id n17so132213faa.19 for ; Mon, 24 Oct 2011 21:49:35 -0700 (PDT) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4EA5ED35.7000806@ti.com> Sender: linux-omap-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org To: "Cousson, Benoit" Cc: "devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org" , "linux-omap@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , "rob.herring@calxeda.com" On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 12:56:53AM +0200, Cousson, Benoit wrote: > On 10/25/2011 12:19 AM, Grant Likely wrote: > >In general, I'm inclined to accept this patch as we talked about at > >plumbers. However, this particular hunk gives me pause as there is > >still the objection that Russell raised about the (ab)use of r->name > >for insert the resource name. > > > >So, no I won't reject this patch, but I first what to have some idea > >of what the plan is to migrate away from using r->name. Perhaps we > >can talk about this tomorrow. > > OK, sure, let's discuss about that. > But I still think that Russell's concern is not related at all with > this patch. That means that it should be fixed separately if needed. > It can be done before or after, but this is somehow orthogonal to > the DT reg-names support problem. Right, but this patch does add more infrastructure code manuipulating that field, so I'd like to have a plan for fixing the problem before committing this. g. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: grant.likely@secretlab.ca (Grant Likely) Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2011 06:49:27 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] of: Add a reg-names property to name reg entries In-Reply-To: <4EA5ED35.7000806@ti.com> References: <1319471697-8970-1-git-send-email-b-cousson@ti.com> <20111024221916.GF4394@ponder.secretlab.ca> <4EA5ED35.7000806@ti.com> Message-ID: <20111025044927.GA798@ponder.secretlab.ca> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 12:56:53AM +0200, Cousson, Benoit wrote: > On 10/25/2011 12:19 AM, Grant Likely wrote: > >In general, I'm inclined to accept this patch as we talked about at > >plumbers. However, this particular hunk gives me pause as there is > >still the objection that Russell raised about the (ab)use of r->name > >for insert the resource name. > > > >So, no I won't reject this patch, but I first what to have some idea > >of what the plan is to migrate away from using r->name. Perhaps we > >can talk about this tomorrow. > > OK, sure, let's discuss about that. > But I still think that Russell's concern is not related at all with > this patch. That means that it should be fixed separately if needed. > It can be done before or after, but this is somehow orthogonal to > the DT reg-names support problem. Right, but this patch does add more infrastructure code manuipulating that field, so I'd like to have a plan for fixing the problem before committing this. g.