From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Rob Herring Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: dts: add interrupt-names property to get interrupt resource by name Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2013 17:27:35 -0500 Message-ID: <514794D7.3060903@gmail.com> References: <1363173980-11428-1-git-send-email-vikas.sajjan@linaro.org> <51408FB9.90808@gmail.com> <514100D9.1000603@gmail.com> <514737D4.8080601@gmail.com> <514758C3.7070601@wwwdotorg.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <514758C3.7070601@wwwdotorg.org> Sender: linux-samsung-soc-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Stephen Warren Cc: Sylwester Nawrocki , linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org, l.krishna@samsung.com, devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org, joshi@samsung.com, inki.dae@samsung.com, kgene.kim@samsung.com, Vikas Sajjan , linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org, Grant Likely List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On 03/18/2013 01:11 PM, Stephen Warren wrote: > On 03/18/2013 09:50 AM, Rob Herring wrote: >> On 03/13/2013 05:42 PM, Sylwester Nawrocki wrote: >>> Rob, >>> >>> On 03/13/2013 03:39 PM, Rob Herring wrote: >>>> I fail to see what the hack is. The order of interrupt properties must >>>> be defined by the binding. interrupt-names is auxiliary data and must >>>> not be required by an OS. > > Is that true for all foo-names properties, or only for interrupt-names? > I was under the impression that foo-names was specifically invented so > that the order of the entries didn't matter, and instead they could be > requested by name. I think it depends on the specific name the property is tied too. For interrupt and reg properties which have a long history and convention, the order should be defined. IIRC, this was Grant's position too. For new bindings, perhaps we can be more lenient. Rob