From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: grant.likely@secretlab.ca (Grant Likely) Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2013 13:40:21 +0100 Subject: [RFC PATCH 2/2] ARM: DT: kernel: DT cpu node bindings update In-Reply-To: <516EBC66.20508@wwwdotorg.org> References: <1366042402-8987-1-git-send-email-lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com> <1366042402-8987-3-git-send-email-lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com> <516C544A.4090107@wwwdotorg.org> <20130417091457.GB5012@e106331-lin.cambridge.arm.com> <516EBC66.20508@wwwdotorg.org> Message-ID: <20130418124021.DE4C63E118C@localhost> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Wed, 17 Apr 2013 09:14:46 -0600, Stephen Warren wrote: > On 04/17/2013 03:14 AM, Mark Rutland wrote: > > Hi Stephen, > > > >>> + - enable-method > >>> + Usage: required on ARM 64-bit systems, optional on ARM 32-bit > >>> + systems > >>> + Value type: > >>> + Definition: On ARM 64-bit systems must be "spin-table" [1]. > >> > >> Can that be an integer instead? with dtc+cpp support, that shouldn't > >> hurt the eyes too much any more. > > > > The "enable-method" property is described as a stringlist by ePAPR, and is > > currently in use on arm64 as such. It *must* remain a string(list) for arm64. > > > > Having it as an integer for arm is only going to cause us additional work, > > makes it impossible to share a common dt between 64bit and 32bit, and goes > > against the standard. I think it should be a stringlist for arm. > > OK, that's a great reason for this case. > > I hope we don't introduce any more standards that use strings, but that > may just be my personal preference... We've got lots of bindings using strings like this. I don't really see any problem with it. g.