From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Maxime Ripard Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 10/29] drm/sun4i: Rename DE2 registers related macros Date: Mon, 8 Oct 2018 12:18:28 +0200 Message-ID: <20181008101828.hb4xtppbexwalbkk@flea> References: <20181007093905.11253-1-jernej.skrabec@siol.net> <20181007093905.11253-11-jernej.skrabec@siol.net> Reply-To: maxime.ripard-LDxbnhwyfcJBDgjK7y7TUQ@public.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="u2h5j7rewatczeh5" Return-path: Sender: linux-sunxi-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20181007093905.11253-11-jernej.skrabec-gGgVlfcn5nU@public.gmane.org> List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: , List-Unsubscribe: , To: Jernej Skrabec Cc: wens-jdAy2FN1RRM@public.gmane.org, robh+dt-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org, sboyd-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org, airlied-cv59FeDIM0c@public.gmane.org, architt-sgV2jX0FEOL9JmXXK+q4OQ@public.gmane.org, a.hajda-Sze3O3UU22JBDgjK7y7TUQ@public.gmane.org, Laurent.pinchart-ryLnwIuWjnjg/C1BVhZhaw@public.gmane.org, devicetree-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org, linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-clk-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, dri-devel-PD4FTy7X32lNgt0PjOBp9y5qC8QIuHrW@public.gmane.org, linux-sunxi-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org --u2h5j7rewatczeh5 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Disposition: inline Hi, On Sun, Oct 07, 2018 at 11:38:46AM +0200, Jernej Skrabec wrote: > In preparation to introduce DE3 support, change prefix from "SUN8I_" to > "DE2_". Current prefix suggest that it's valid only for one family, > whereas in reality, DE2 unit is used also on sun50i family. > Additionally, it will be easier to distinguish DE3 specific macros by > using "DE3_" prefix. > > No functional change in this commit. I'm not too sure about this one. There's basically two ways to look at this: you described the first one, and the second one would be to treat it as we do for the compatibles: the IP was introduced on one SoC family, and then got used on some other ones. Trying to always match the one you have however have a quite big maintainance cost, as can be shown by your patch: you always have to adapt comments, function names, defines, etc. This creates a lot of useless churns (ie, non-functional changes) in the drivers, that need to be written in the first place, and then reviewed. It's just not worth it. Maxime -- Maxime Ripard, Bootlin Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering https://bootlin.com --u2h5j7rewatczeh5--