From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [Gta04-owner] [PATCH 0/4] UART slave device support - version 4
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2016 19:15:43 +0000
Message-ID: <20160113191542.GA12086@leverpostej>
References: <20150511013540.5709.93626.stgit@notabene.brown>
 <CAAObsKD7-02HVUosXVwqcH6HyGEGYJ9jdNepuNhLiiL+ujO5iw@mail.gmail.com>
 <481E05A9-A192-438D-B092-D7700B30BBC4@goldelico.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Return-path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <481E05A9-A192-438D-B092-D7700B30BBC4@goldelico.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
To: "H. Nikolaus Schaller" <hns@goldelico.com>
Cc: List for communicating with real GTA04 owners <gta04-owner@goldelico.com>, tomeu@tomeuvizoso.net, NeilBrown <neil@brown.name>, One Thousand Gnomes <gnomes@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>, Peter Hurley <peter@hurleysoftware.com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>, "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>, Sebastian Reichel <sre@kernel.org>, "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Rob Herring <robherring2@gmail.com>, Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>, linux-serial@vger.kernel.org, Grant Likely <grant.likely@linaro.org>, Jiri Slaby <jslaby@suse.cz>, Marek Belisko <marek@goldelico.com>
List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org

On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 02:28:00PM +0100, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
> Hi Tomeu,
> 
> Am 12.01.2016 um 14:06 schrieb Tomeu Vizoso <tomeu@tomeuvizoso.net>:
> 
> > On 11 May 2015 at 03:56, NeilBrown <neil@brown.name> wrote:
> >> Hi all,
> >> here is version 4 of my "UART slave device" patch set, previously
> >> known as "tty slave devices".
> > 
> > Hi Neil,
> > 
> > do you (or someone else) have plans to continue this work in the short
> > or medium term?
> 
> yes, there is something in our upstreaming pipeline. This one works for us on top of 4.4.0:
> 
> <http://git.goldelico.com/?p=gta04-kernel.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/work/hns/misc/w2sg-tty-slave2-v4>
> 
> There is one point still to be solved: the exact style of the DT bindings.
> 
> We have an idea how a driver can implement two different styles (child node AND phandle)
> so that it is up to the DTS developer to use the one that best fits into the existing DTS.

>>From my perspective as a binding maintainer, and as I stated before, the
child node approach made the most sense and was most consistent with the
way we handle other devices.

I don't understand what the benefit of supporting two styles of
description would be, relative to the maintenance cost. Nor do I
understand your fixation with the phandle approach, given it has been
repeatedly disagreed with by binding maintainers.

Thanks,
Mark.