From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mark Brown Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] arm64: dts: add initial dts for Samsung GH7 SoC and SSDK-GH7 board Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2014 12:48:31 +0000 Message-ID: <20140314124831.GU366@sirena.org.uk> References: <1394491879-5320-1-git-send-email-kgene.kim@samsung.com> <1394491879-5320-2-git-send-email-kgene.kim@samsung.com> <20140311182922.GD3263@e106331-lin.cambridge.arm.com> <01c501cf3dac$022879b0$06796d10$@samsung.com> <20140313103329.GD5035@e106331-lin.cambridge.arm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="FqExhoTtZ2UFWcPs" Return-path: Received: from mezzanine.sirena.org.uk ([106.187.55.193]:52289 "EHLO mezzanine.sirena.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752551AbaCNMsm (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 Mar 2014 08:48:42 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20140313103329.GD5035@e106331-lin.cambridge.arm.com> Sender: linux-samsung-soc-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org To: Mark Rutland Cc: Kukjin Kim , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , "linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org" , Catalin Marinas , 'Thomas Abraham' , 'Ilho Lee' --FqExhoTtZ2UFWcPs Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 10:33:29AM +0000, Mark Rutland wrote: > On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 04:31:56AM +0000, Kukjin Kim wrote: > > > > +/ { > > > > + model = "SAMSUNG SSDK-GH7 board based on GH7 SoC"; > > > Is the "based on GH7 SoC" part necessary? Does the "SSDK-GH7" not give > > > that away? > > In this case, yes, SSDK-GH7 is enough but I though, in case of different > > board adding what SoC is used on the board in that is useful. Anyway, OK. > Looking at ePAPR, the recommended format is "manufacturer,model", and > the string is intended to identify a particular implementation. It is > not intended to give details about the implementation that can be > derived from the name. > We seem to have ignored the format (and to some degree purpose) of the > model property so far, but I don't see any reason to fill it with > unnecessary information. Might it be worth defining a property explicitly intended to be used as a display name for human consumption? Half the problem with model is that we don't have a way to use it for quirking so nobody ever really looks at it (though I guess we will want that at some point now we're going for fixed ABI stuff), but not having a place to put a pretty name does encourage this sort of thing. --FqExhoTtZ2UFWcPs Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJTIvqbAAoJELSic+t+oim9Au0P/jHh7yZn9MA8gcQPZ9qrf95K XoJskG1Faw6vDD0G8JRCRG44C/bAw6ri/tFmVtv+lKMJ+CpB6FjBaIZGRvPCRa00 DjinoxwxcbYwK4iRhMUcS2Kj8uhoDHZRS/6GmJxvF2ubZZ+eMn7BFswJhddlsdPd yxcHoXwXIRfezb6sYwWxr7q3ciJatGcLJCnqDKNJlCi9NNbVbh/TXW6YzUKnUGTl kD85if++I2n2ltjxuMUB/XVTt3IWGqK4JPMZ55aH402Ke5F/d7FNw7NIZveRW620 4cM/lKKZSHES/pfNvGPfoimHRq0NcHFmcuUoFBB/39A0lORlP+n0r9ZECB1Bm+R6 jG/9kfSp/XxYOM8N0/EqgpbSTjfH6ia9ZEnjhc2uDNG+ydBvMfAYdWolKYwlpUTN W/ojfIToEGWNXjoMJMr8/qLrup/es6IauBBEQpwSGtZkPl7VELCOsBc0wv5rfn7M 2bGEl2JMqssve5cNJIjc8l/L1EbkalUddFTUApJY/B6AZfG8Tur2rnvRSfs3/Oqx RMAoedmdNbDYaCgO9vynjJLWtXvspAh0Ybzo1iewm+F6GqE9Ec5eFdunPF+KNW1X l6yIoqFti1vsrqNwgAjL+aMjg8dK5njwUbcJj7cMR9MiYcLdKmS1AiU/K1ijQ9tt kr6f/CFIJ0S77Mhn0fjr =Y/O3 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --FqExhoTtZ2UFWcPs-- From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: broonie@kernel.org (Mark Brown) Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2014 12:48:31 +0000 Subject: [PATCH v2 1/3] arm64: dts: add initial dts for Samsung GH7 SoC and SSDK-GH7 board In-Reply-To: <20140313103329.GD5035@e106331-lin.cambridge.arm.com> References: <1394491879-5320-1-git-send-email-kgene.kim@samsung.com> <1394491879-5320-2-git-send-email-kgene.kim@samsung.com> <20140311182922.GD3263@e106331-lin.cambridge.arm.com> <01c501cf3dac$022879b0$06796d10$@samsung.com> <20140313103329.GD5035@e106331-lin.cambridge.arm.com> Message-ID: <20140314124831.GU366@sirena.org.uk> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 10:33:29AM +0000, Mark Rutland wrote: > On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 04:31:56AM +0000, Kukjin Kim wrote: > > > > +/ { > > > > + model = "SAMSUNG SSDK-GH7 board based on GH7 SoC"; > > > Is the "based on GH7 SoC" part necessary? Does the "SSDK-GH7" not give > > > that away? > > In this case, yes, SSDK-GH7 is enough but I though, in case of different > > board adding what SoC is used on the board in that is useful. Anyway, OK. > Looking at ePAPR, the recommended format is "manufacturer,model", and > the string is intended to identify a particular implementation. It is > not intended to give details about the implementation that can be > derived from the name. > We seem to have ignored the format (and to some degree purpose) of the > model property so far, but I don't see any reason to fill it with > unnecessary information. Might it be worth defining a property explicitly intended to be used as a display name for human consumption? Half the problem with model is that we don't have a way to use it for quirking so nobody ever really looks at it (though I guess we will want that at some point now we're going for fixed ABI stuff), but not having a place to put a pretty name does encourage this sort of thing. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 836 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: