From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: afaerber@suse.de (=?UTF-8?B?QW5kcmVhcyBGw6RyYmVy?=) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2014 19:03:32 +0100 Subject: [PATCH RESEND] Documentation: devicetree: Fix Xilinx VDMA specification In-Reply-To: <6067bede14b9421fa87db96bdc66dc66@BN1AFFO11FD040.protection.gbl> References: <1415800277-6817-1-git-send-email-afaerber@suse.de> <6067bede14b9421fa87db96bdc66dc66@BN1AFFO11FD040.protection.gbl> Message-ID: <5463A0F4.6060300@suse.de> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Am 12.11.2014 um 16:57 schrieb S?ren Brinkmann: > On Wed, 2014-11-12 at 02:51PM +0100, Andreas F?rber wrote: >> The specification requires xlnx,data-width, but example and driver use >> xlnx,datawidth. Change the specification to match the implementation. > > Isn't this the wrong way around? The bindings are considered API, so > shouldn't the driver be fixed to match the spec? In theory, patch review should've never let the two differ... ;) It's not my driver, so I fixed the perceived inconsistency the least invasive way; Michal and Srikanth seemed to concur at the time. https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/4620261/ > Are there already dts files out there using either of these options? In upstream, no. microblaze and virtex440 use a xlnx,include-datawidth-matching-0 property as precedence for the spelling, whereas there is an fsl,data-width and an unused msix-data-width. Downstream, yes: Beyond my own patch derived from the Parallella tree, there's some in the ADI tree. None in the Xilinx tree on quick check. I haven't encountered any using the documented xlnx,data-width - but this patch was authored pre 3.17, haven't ran a full Web search again. Regards, Andreas -- SUSE LINUX GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 N?rnberg, Germany GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imend?rffer; HRB 21284 AG N?rnberg -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 836 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: