From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com (Thomas Petazzoni) Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2016 10:48:58 +0100 Subject: [PATCH 5/10] dt: bindings: Add bindings for Marvell Xenon SD Host Controller In-Reply-To: <8737ihmctr.fsf@free-electrons.com> References: <4031579.CBE32NHUoW@wuerfel> <877f7tmduw.fsf@free-electrons.com> <28082657.RK5ubAe11Q@wuerfel> <8737ihmctr.fsf@free-electrons.com> Message-ID: <20161124104858.3604c11d@free-electrons.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Hello, On Thu, 24 Nov 2016 10:44:48 +0100, Gregory CLEMENT wrote: > "A single Xenon IP can support multiple slots. > Each slot acts as an independent SDHC. It owns independent resources, such > as register sets clock and PHY. > Each slot should have an independent device tree node." I think this wording is still very confusing, and continues to cause confusion. We should just state that each Xenon controller supports a single slot, and that's it. The text still says "a single Xenon IP can support multiple slots", which continues to cause confusion. Best regards, Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering http://free-electrons.com