All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen@ti.com>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] dt-bindings: simplefb-sunxi: Add sunxi simplefb extensions
Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2014 08:13:39 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <54758BB3.9090008@ti.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5474880F.8040908@redhat.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1605 bytes --]

On 25/11/14 15:45, Hans de Goede wrote:

>> Wouldn't
>>
>> compatible = "allwinner,sun4i-simple-framebuffer", "simple-framebuffer";
>>
>> tell that it's a simple-framebuffer, with allwinner's sun4i extensions?
>>
>> I guess you can have just "allwinner,simple-framebuffer", and then if a
>> new Allwinner SoC has a totally different display controller, the
>> documentation would specify that this property is for that SoC, and this
>> another property is for that another SoC. But isn't the compatible
>> string what's supposed to use in cases like this?
> 
> The only soc specific thing in the binding is the pipeline property string
> values, and we can always add new values to that, the rest is all generic,
> as simplefb is generic.

The thing I don't understand is that the compatible string states that
"this covers all Allwinner SoCs", even if we have no idea what kind of
SoCs those may be. And if it covers all kinds of SoCs, then it might as
well be fully generic, not Allwinner specific.

And if it's not fully generic, then having it cover all possible
Allwinner SoCs doesn't make sense either.

> As said Ian Campbell, Grant and me have decided on using this, and
> currently
> patches are already queued up for both the dts files and u-boot to use
> this,
> so unless there are really strong reasons to change it at this point I
> would
> prefer to keep this as is.

Ok. Well, as I said, it does not look correct to me, but if everybody
else agrees on it (and I see I didn't get any replies during the night),
I'll be applying this today.

 Tomi



[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: tomi.valkeinen@ti.com (Tomi Valkeinen)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v3 2/2] dt-bindings: simplefb-sunxi: Add sunxi simplefb extensions
Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2014 10:13:39 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <54758BB3.9090008@ti.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5474880F.8040908@redhat.com>

On 25/11/14 15:45, Hans de Goede wrote:

>> Wouldn't
>>
>> compatible = "allwinner,sun4i-simple-framebuffer", "simple-framebuffer";
>>
>> tell that it's a simple-framebuffer, with allwinner's sun4i extensions?
>>
>> I guess you can have just "allwinner,simple-framebuffer", and then if a
>> new Allwinner SoC has a totally different display controller, the
>> documentation would specify that this property is for that SoC, and this
>> another property is for that another SoC. But isn't the compatible
>> string what's supposed to use in cases like this?
> 
> The only soc specific thing in the binding is the pipeline property string
> values, and we can always add new values to that, the rest is all generic,
> as simplefb is generic.

The thing I don't understand is that the compatible string states that
"this covers all Allwinner SoCs", even if we have no idea what kind of
SoCs those may be. And if it covers all kinds of SoCs, then it might as
well be fully generic, not Allwinner specific.

And if it's not fully generic, then having it cover all possible
Allwinner SoCs doesn't make sense either.

> As said Ian Campbell, Grant and me have decided on using this, and
> currently
> patches are already queued up for both the dts files and u-boot to use
> this,
> so unless there are really strong reasons to change it at this point I
> would
> prefer to keep this as is.

Ok. Well, as I said, it does not look correct to me, but if everybody
else agrees on it (and I see I didn't get any replies during the night),
I'll be applying this today.

 Tomi


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/attachments/20141126/1f5ca4bb/attachment.sig>

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen-l0cyMroinI0@public.gmane.org>
To: Hans de Goede <hdegoede-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
Cc: Grant Likely
	<grant.likely-QSEj5FYQhm4dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>,
	Ian Campbell <ijc-KcIKpvwj1kUDXYZnReoRVg@public.gmane.org>,
	Rob Herring <robh+dt-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>,
	Maxime Ripard
	<maxime.ripard-wi1+55ScJUtKEb57/3fJTNBPR1lH4CV8@public.gmane.org>,
	David Herrmann
	<dh.herrmann-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>,
	Geert Uytterhoeven
	<geert-Td1EMuHUCqxL1ZNQvxDV9g@public.gmane.org>,
	linux-fbdev-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
	linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org,
	devicetree <devicetree-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org>,
	linux-sunxi-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] dt-bindings: simplefb-sunxi: Add sunxi simplefb extensions
Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2014 10:13:39 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <54758BB3.9090008@ti.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5474880F.8040908-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1562 bytes --]

On 25/11/14 15:45, Hans de Goede wrote:

>> Wouldn't
>>
>> compatible = "allwinner,sun4i-simple-framebuffer", "simple-framebuffer";
>>
>> tell that it's a simple-framebuffer, with allwinner's sun4i extensions?
>>
>> I guess you can have just "allwinner,simple-framebuffer", and then if a
>> new Allwinner SoC has a totally different display controller, the
>> documentation would specify that this property is for that SoC, and this
>> another property is for that another SoC. But isn't the compatible
>> string what's supposed to use in cases like this?
> 
> The only soc specific thing in the binding is the pipeline property string
> values, and we can always add new values to that, the rest is all generic,
> as simplefb is generic.

The thing I don't understand is that the compatible string states that
"this covers all Allwinner SoCs", even if we have no idea what kind of
SoCs those may be. And if it covers all kinds of SoCs, then it might as
well be fully generic, not Allwinner specific.

And if it's not fully generic, then having it cover all possible
Allwinner SoCs doesn't make sense either.

> As said Ian Campbell, Grant and me have decided on using this, and
> currently
> patches are already queued up for both the dts files and u-boot to use
> this,
> so unless there are really strong reasons to change it at this point I
> would
> prefer to keep this as is.

Ok. Well, as I said, it does not look correct to me, but if everybody
else agrees on it (and I see I didn't get any replies during the night),
I'll be applying this today.

 Tomi

  reply	other threads:[~2014-11-26  8:13 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-11-18 11:10 [PATCH v3 0/2] dt-bindings: simplefb: Drop the advice about using a specific path for nodes Hans de Goede
2014-11-18 11:10 ` Hans de Goede
2014-11-18 11:10 ` Hans de Goede
2014-11-18 11:10 ` [PATCH v3 1/2] " Hans de Goede
2014-11-18 11:10   ` Hans de Goede
2014-11-18 11:10   ` Hans de Goede
2014-11-18 11:10 ` [PATCH v3 2/2] dt-bindings: simplefb-sunxi: Add sunxi simplefb extensions Hans de Goede
2014-11-18 11:10   ` Hans de Goede
2014-11-18 11:10   ` Hans de Goede
2014-11-25 12:32   ` Tomi Valkeinen
2014-11-25 12:32     ` Tomi Valkeinen
2014-11-25 12:32     ` Tomi Valkeinen
2014-11-25 12:52     ` Hans de Goede
2014-11-25 12:52       ` Hans de Goede
2014-11-25 12:52       ` Hans de Goede
2014-11-25 13:02       ` Tomi Valkeinen
2014-11-25 13:02         ` Tomi Valkeinen
2014-11-25 13:02         ` Tomi Valkeinen
2014-11-25 13:21         ` Hans de Goede
2014-11-25 13:21           ` Hans de Goede
2014-11-25 13:21           ` Hans de Goede
2014-11-25 13:38           ` Tomi Valkeinen
2014-11-25 13:38             ` Tomi Valkeinen
2014-11-25 13:38             ` Tomi Valkeinen
2014-11-25 13:45             ` Hans de Goede
2014-11-25 13:45               ` Hans de Goede
2014-11-25 13:45               ` Hans de Goede
2014-11-26  8:13               ` Tomi Valkeinen [this message]
2014-11-26  8:13                 ` Tomi Valkeinen
2014-11-26  8:13                 ` Tomi Valkeinen
2014-11-25 12:34 ` [PATCH v3 0/2] dt-bindings: simplefb: Drop the advice about using a specific path for nodes Tomi Valkeinen
2014-11-25 12:34   ` Tomi Valkeinen
2014-11-25 12:34   ` Tomi Valkeinen

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=54758BB3.9090008@ti.com \
    --to=tomi.valkeinen@ti.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.