From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Hans de Goede Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] dt-bindings: simplefb-sunxi: Add sunxi simplefb extensions Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2014 14:21:19 +0100 Message-ID: <5474824F.8080000@redhat.com> References: <1416309051-26784-1-git-send-email-hdegoede@redhat.com> <1416309051-26784-3-git-send-email-hdegoede@redhat.com> <547476DA.2030004@ti.com> <54747B72.1050406@redhat.com> <54747DCF.9010502@ti.com> Reply-To: linux-sunxi-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Return-path: In-Reply-To: <54747DCF.9010502-l0cyMroinI0@public.gmane.org> List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: , List-Unsubscribe: , To: Tomi Valkeinen Cc: Grant Likely , Ian Campbell , Rob Herring , Maxime Ripard , David Herrmann , Geert Uytterhoeven , linux-fbdev-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org, devicetree , linux-sunxi-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org Hi, On 11/25/2014 02:02 PM, Tomi Valkeinen wrote: > On 25/11/14 14:52, Hans de Goede wrote: > >>>> +Required properties: >>>> +- compatible: "allwinner,simple-framebuffer" >>>> +- allwinner,pipeline, one of: >>> >>> Sorry my ignorance, but what's sunxi and what's allwinner? Both names >>> are mixed here. >> >> sunxi is the sun#i SoCs from Allwinner, Allwinner is the manufacturer >> and the >> SoC "code" names used everywhere in the kernel for their SoCs are sun4i, >> sun5i, >> sun6i, etc. Most people refer to these SoCs as sunxi. This is also what the >> linux-sunxi mailinglist in the Cc is about. >> >> The official devicetree vendor prefix for Allwinner is allwinner, hence the >> allwinner in the compatible name, see e.g. also >> >> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/input/sun4i-lradc-keys.txt >> >> Which also uses sunxi / sun4i everywhere except in the compatible vendor >> prefix. > > Alright, thanks for explanation. > > Shouldn't the compatible then be "allwinner,sunxi-simple-framebuffer", > to differentiate from some other SoC Allwinner has or might create in > the future? That is, presuming you're confident enough that a single > compatible string covers all the current and forthcoming sunxi SoCs. This was discussed in an earlier thread, we (Ian Campbell, Grant and me) decided to settle on allwinner,simple-framebuffer to make it clear that these are allwinner extensions to the standard simple-framebuffer bindings, and that the node otherwise is simple-framebuffer compatible. We were afraid that e.g. sun4i-simple-framebuffer would signal that it is not a normal simple-framebuffer node, so we decided to go with just the allwinner, prefix to indicate that it uses allwinner specific extensions. Regards, Hans