From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: swarren@wwwdotorg.org (Stephen Warren)
Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2013 10:35:00 -0700
Subject: [PATCH 1/1] ARM: dt: add header to define tegra20 clocks
In-Reply-To: <20130219053148.GC3108@S2101-09.ap.freescale.net>
References: <1360791198-29462-1-git-send-email-swarren@wwwdotorg.org>
 <1360823899-17846-1-git-send-email-hdoyu@nvidia.com>
 <511D24D4.6070805@wwwdotorg.org>
 <20130219053148.GC3108@S2101-09.ap.freescale.net>
Message-ID: <5123B7C4.9030002@wwwdotorg.org>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

On 02/18/2013 10:31 PM, Shawn Guo wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 10:54:28AM -0700, Stephen Warren wrote:
>> On 02/13/2013 11:38 PM, Hiroshi Doyu wrote:
>>> To replace magic number in "clocks = <&tegra_car 28>;"
>>
>> I like the concept here; I was thinking about doing this today, but you
>> beat me to it:-) Feel free to create the Tegra30 header too, and modify
>> all the *.dts* files.
>>
>> To address other comments in this thread: Yes, I think that we will want
>> to modify the clock driver to include this header to avoid
>> duplication/errors (that will require adjusting Linux's include path),
>> and also remove the list of IDs from the binding document; it can just
>> refer the the new header by name and cause the header to *be* part of
>> the binding document.
> 
> I like it, since doing so will help us hijack kernel to have dts stay
> in the tree rather than going to a separate repository :)

Well, at least the header files would need to stay in the kernel. The
.txt binding documentation wouldn't have to though.

I guess this is a good argument for not putting these header files into
Documentation/devicetree/bindings, and adding that to the include path,
but rather putting the headers somewhere else.

> Seriously, is maintaining dts in a separate repository still a plan?
> If yes, we will have duplication problem someday anyway.
> 
> For reason of it, I vote for having dts stay in the kernel tree.
> 
> Shawn
>