Re: [PATCH] ARM: dts: add interrupt-names property to get interrupt resource by name

[Stephen Warren <swarren@wwwdotorg.org>]

On 03/18/2013 04:27 PM, Rob Herring wrote:
> 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.

OK, that makes sense for interrupts/reg. Can we decide that clock-namess
are new-style and that order is not significant? I guess gpio-names too?

I guess this should be documented in whatever binding describes the core
interrupts/reg-names/gpio-names/clock-names/dma-names properties.