From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Gerhard Sittig Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] dts: mpc512x: adjust clock specs for FEC nodes Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2014 11:52:09 +0100 Message-ID: <20140305105209.GZ3327@book.gsilab.sittig.org> References: <1393237557-31406-1-git-send-email-gsi@denx.de> <1393237557-31406-2-git-send-email-gsi@denx.de> <20140303092231.GS3327@book.gsilab.sittig.org> <20140305014836.GC8784@S2101-09.ap.freescale.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20140305014836.GC8784-rvtDTF3kK1ictlrPMvKcciBecyulp+rMXqFh9Ls21Oc@public.gmane.org> Sender: devicetree-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Shawn Guo Cc: devicetree-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org, linuxppc-dev-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org, Mark Rutland , Anatolij Gustschin , Mike Turquette , Pawel Moll , Ian Campbell , Rob Herring List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Mar 05, 2014 at 09:48 +0800, Shawn Guo wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 03, 2014 at 10:22:31AM +0100, Gerhard Sittig wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 11:25 +0100, Gerhard Sittig wrote: > > > > > > a recent FEC binding document update that was motivated by i.MX > > > development revealed that ARM and PowerPC implementations in Linux > > > did not agree on the clock names to use for the FEC nodes > > > > > > change clock names from "per" to "ipg" in the FEC nodes of the > > > mpc5121.dtsi include file such that the .dts specs comply with > > > the common FEC binding > > > > > > this "incompatible" change does not break operation, because > > > - COMMON_CLK support for MPC5121/23/25 and adjusted .dts files > > > were only introduced in Linux v3.14-rc1, no mainline release > > > provided these specs before > > > - if this change won't make it for v3.14, the MPC512x CCF support > > > provides full backwards compability, and keeps operating with > > > device trees which lack clock specs or don't match in the names > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Gerhard Sittig > > > > ping > > > > Are there opinions about making PowerPC users of FEC use the same > > clock names as ARM users do, to re-use (actually: keep sharing) > > the FEC binding? The alternative would be to fragment the FEC > > binding into several bindings for ARM and PowerPC, which I feel > > would be undesirable, and is not necessary. > > As I already said, Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/fsl-fec.txt > was created specifically for i.MX FEC controller from day one. And even > as of today, it doesn't serve PowerPC, because for example the property > 'phy-mode' documented as required one is not required by PowerPC FEC. > My opinion would be to patch fsl-fec.txt a little bit to make it clear > that it's a binding doc for i.MX FEC, and create the other one for > PowerPC FEC. This is the way less confusing to people and easier for > binding maintenance. Should we still try to have a common behaviour where possible? Such that even if there are two bindings, they don't diverge in "unnecessary" ways? But given that we already are past -rc5, I guess the suggested change is too late for v3.14 anyway. So we have to live with the fact of a mainline release of different behaviour. And the backwards compatibility support in the MPC512x CCF implementation allows to cope with a potential future "ipg" unification while still working with former "per" using device trees. There's no blocker. So nevermind. virtually yours Gerhard Sittig -- DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr. 5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany Phone: +49-8142-66989-0 Fax: +49-8142-66989-80 Email: office-ynQEQJNshbs@public.gmane.org -- 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