From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Arnd Bergmann Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 06/10] soc: Add SoC specific driver support for nuc900 Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2016 11:50:28 +0200 Message-ID: <1510379.YVtTfMI32O@wuerfel> References: <1468135649-19980-1-git-send-email-vw@iommu.org> <4765191.NGpMC1JR46@wuerfel> <5784B302.80307@iommu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: In-Reply-To: <5784B302.80307@iommu.org> Sender: linux-clk-owner@vger.kernel.org To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Cc: Wan Zongshun , devicetree@vger.kernel.org, jason@lakedaemon.net, Wan Zongshun , Daniel Lezcano , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Russell King , p.zabel@pengutronix.de, Thomas Gleixner , linux-clk@vger.kernel.org List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On Tuesday, July 12, 2016 5:06:10 PM CEST Wan Zongshun wrote: > On 2016=E5=B9=B407=E6=9C=8811=E6=97=A5 16:03, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > On Sunday, July 10, 2016 3:27:26 PM CEST Wan Zongshun wrote: > > I'm still a bit unsure about the set of attributes here. > > > > - The "soc_id" is read from the device tree from the field that con= tains > > the board name, I think for consistency you should try to map th= e > > GCR_CHIPID to the name of the SoC and assign that here > > > > - The "machine" is hardcoded to "NUC900EVB", which in turn looks li= ke > > a particular board but not the one you are running on. Maybe rea= d > > that from the DT instead? > > > > - The "revision" is not filled at all, I would suggest using someth= ing > > derived from the GCR_CHIPID register here > > > > - you have two nonstandard attributes "chipid" and "version", which > > I'd hope to avoid -- the set of standard attributes is supposed = to > > give enough information about the machine, and platform independ= ent > > user space will never read those. >=20 > So, Maybe I can remove those two codes, no need push those informatio= n=20 > to user space? >=20 > device_create_file(soc_device_to_device(soc_dev), &nuc900_chipid_attr= ); > device_create_file(soc_device_to_device(soc_dev), &nuc900_version_att= r); >=20 Yes, that would be good. Arnd