From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Sylwester Nawrocki Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: dts: add interrupt-names property to get interrupt resource by name Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2013 23:31:54 +0100 Message-ID: <5148E75A.5060409@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> <514794D7.3060903@gmail.com> <51479DBC.2080703@wwwdotorg.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <51479DBC.2080703@wwwdotorg.org> Sender: linux-samsung-soc-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Stephen Warren Cc: Rob Herring , 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 03/19/2013 12:05 AM, Stephen Warren wrote: > 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. It certainly would be useful to have it documented somewhere. Not sure if resource-names.txt would be a good place to have more information about the order for each property.