From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: shawnguo@kernel.org (Shawn Guo) Date: Thu, 25 May 2017 14:23:49 +0800 Subject: [PATCH V2 4/5] dt-bindings: pinctrl: add imx7ulp pinctrl binding doc In-Reply-To: References: <1495177545-23006-1-git-send-email-aisheng.dong@nxp.com> <1495177545-23006-5-git-send-email-aisheng.dong@nxp.com> <5e78ef100319f229a87e33804384e5b3@agner.ch> <20170525031620.GS26102@dragon> Message-ID: <20170525062347.GT26102@dragon> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Thu, May 25, 2017 at 05:04:58AM +0000, A.S. Dong wrote: > If we really want to change, 'IMX7ULP1' may be a little strange as 'IMX7ULP' is > the official external name and all other places are using it. > So IMX7ULP may be more suitable. Yes, I actually meant IMX7ULP, which matches how we name the SoC elsewhere in the kernel. > > Then next generation may be: > IMX7ULP0_PAD_PTC0_PTC0. > Vs > IMX7ULP_PAD_PTC0_PTC0 > > Just not much better than: > ULP1_PAD_PTC0_PTC0. > vs > ULP0_PAD_PTC0_PTC0 > > That's why I did not do it initially. > > However, if you do want the change, i'm okay to do it. For the next generation, we will have a name for it in the kernel anyway. The pinctrl macro simply follows that name. Shawn