From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tomasz Figa Subject: Re: [PATCH V11 1/3] ARM: dts: Add pmu sysreg node to exynos5250 and exynos5420 dtsi files Date: Thu, 05 Dec 2013 19:59:15 +0100 Message-ID: <1676404.arUWsvfauz@flatron> References: <1385613243-3559-1-git-send-email-l.krishna@samsung.com> <1979723.ga7TBeh7CQ@flatron> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-samsung-soc-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Doug Anderson Cc: Olof Johansson , Leela Krishna Amudala , "linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org" , Wim Van Sebroeck , Kukjin Kim , Tomasz Figa , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org" , "cpgs ." , Guenter Roeck List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On Thursday 05 of December 2013 10:35:20 Doug Anderson wrote: > Tomasz, > > On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 10:30 AM, Tomasz Figa wrote: > >> I'd vote for using "pmu-system-registers". We end up using the > >> "syscon" subsystem but really we're describing pmu registers. > >> > >> I'd even say that you don't need to formally specify the "name" in the > >> bindings (though I'm not up with all the latest device tree > >> requirements). ...still you'd want to use "pmu-system-registers" in > >> the DTS changes. > > > > Well, since the name should specify the class of device, I would say that > > pmu-system-registers is too specific. If we want to change this, I'd say > > we should go with system-controller. > > ...but the "compatible" is "samsung,exynos5250-pmu", "syscon", right? > That means that the class of the device is "exynos5250-pmu", right? Nope. "samsung,exynos5250-pmu" is the specific device (or hardware programming interface) this device is compatible with. With class I mean the generic kind of device, such as system-controller, i2c, pinctrl, display, etc., as specified by sections 2.2.1 and 2.2.2 of ePAPR. Anyway, node names are just a matter of coding style, as they don't have any semantical meaning in most cases (such as this one). > It is also compatible with the generic "syscon" class of devices. It is also compatible with the generic "syscon" programming interface, which represents a set of loosely related registers that control various aspects of other IP blocks. Best regards, Tomasz