Re: [PATCH v8 14/16] ARM: dts: Introduce STM32F429 MCU

From: Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com>
To: Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@pengutronix.de>
Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
	"linux-doc@vger.kernel.org" <linux-doc@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
	Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>, Stefan Agner <stefan@agner.ch>,
	Nikolay Borisov <Nikolay.Borisov@arm.com>,
	Peter Meerwald <pmeerw@pmeerw.net>,
	"linux-api@vger.kernel.org" <linux-api@vger.kernel.org>,
	Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>,
	Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@osg.samsung.com>,
	Linux-Arch <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>,
	Daniel Thompson <daniel.thompson@linaro.org>,
	Russell King <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>,
	Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@arm.com>, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
	Jiri Slaby <jslaby@suse.cz>,
	Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>,
	Chanwoo Choi <cw00.choi@samsung.com>,
	Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com>,
	Antti Palosaari <crope@iki.fi>,
	Geert Uytterhoeven
	<geert@linux-m68k.org>"linux-serial@vger.kernel.org" <li>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 14/16] ARM: dts: Introduce STM32F429 MCU
Date: Fri, 22 May 2015 11:18:22 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150522091822.GF8557@lukather> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1432285588.3929.28.camel@pengutronix.de>

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1261 bytes --]

On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 11:06:28AM +0200, Philipp Zabel wrote:
> > In the probe function, it would check the number of reg resources.
> > If a single resource is passed, it would take it, else it would look
> > the one named "reset".
> > The driver and bindings would be the same for the two families, and
> > the bindings would be backward compatible with sunxi ones.
> > 
> > Philip, Arnd, what do you think?
> 
> I'm not a fan of describing the register layout in the device tree as
> detailed as the sunxi bindings do. I'd prefer the reg property to
> describe the device's register address space with one entry per
> contiguous block of registers.

That's exactly what we do.

> Unifying the mostly identical drivers is a good idea though, and reusing
> preexisting bindings is better than inventing new ones. I favor the
> socfpga binding, but I still like the sunxi bindings and this proposal
> better than encoding the register offset in the reset index.

I don't really get the difference between the socfpga and our bindings
actually. Would you mind to explain a bit further what you don't like
about it ?

Maxime
-- 
Maxime Ripard, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering
http://free-electrons.com

[-- Attachment #1.2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 176 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel