From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mark Rutland Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 01/13] [media] exynos5-is: Adding media device driver for exynos5 Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2013 09:54:40 +0000 Message-ID: <20131112095440.GC2976@e106331-lin.cambridge.arm.com> References: <1380279558-21651-1-git-send-email-arun.kk@samsung.com> <1380279558-21651-2-git-send-email-arun.kk@samsung.com> <20131111161213.GK21201@e106331-lin.cambridge.arm.com> <20131111192515.GP17929@book.gsilab.sittig.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20131111192515.GP17929-kDjWylLy9wD0K7fsECOQyeGNnDKD8DIp@public.gmane.org> Sender: devicetree-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: "devicetree-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org" , "swarren-3lzwWm7+Weoh9ZMKESR00Q@public.gmane.org" , Pawel Moll , "galak-sgV2jX0FEOL9JmXXK+q4OQ@public.gmane.org" List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 07:25:51PM +0000, Gerhard Sittig wrote: > [ reduced the CC: list to device tree people ] > > On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 16:12 +0000, Mark Rutland wrote: > > > > On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 11:59:06AM +0100, Arun Kumar K wrote: > > > > > > +Required properties: > > > + > > > +- compatible : must be "samsung,exynos5250-fimc" > > > +- clocks : list of clock specifiers, corresponding to entries in > > > + the clock-names property > > > > Minor nit: clocks are references by phandle + clock-specifier pairs, as > > the clock-specifier is separate from the phandle to the clock. > > Out of interest, and to learn the correct terminology for future > reference, I thought I'd ask: > > Are the integer cells _the_ "specifier" which complements the > "phandle"? Or does the "specifier" _consist_ of a phandle _and_ > a (potentially empty) set of integer cells which all together > uniqely specify the resource? The integer cells constitute the specifier, complementing the phandle. > > For clocks and gpios I would tend towards the latter model, it > feels more intuitive to me. I always felt interrupts to be the > exception in that their parent and the integer cells are spread > across individual properties. Which in itself poses a > limitation, and I've seen patches trying to bring those two parts > of the specification together, such that members of a list of > interrupts can reference items from different parents. Arguably it would might make more sense to refer to the phandle + integer cells as a whole as a specifier, but it would screw up a lot of existing documentation. Each of the #${x}-cells properties define the size of their respective ${x}-specifiers. If we were to declare the specifier to include the phandle, then each #${x}-cells property would be the size of the specifier minus one (in some cases, but not all as interrupts would still exist). I suspect this would lead to more confusion. All of our existing documentation and mailing lists posts wouldn't match the new way of referring to things. I don't see any value to be had in trying to adjust the terminology now. If you have a suggestion for a term for the composite phandle + specifier pair, then perhaps that would be useful. Thanks, Mark. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html