From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Suman Anna Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 1/4] Documentation: dt: add common bindings for hwspinlock Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2015 11:56:37 -0600 Message-ID: <54BFE855.3090200@ti.com> References: <1421269101-51105-1-git-send-email-s-anna@ti.com> <1421269101-51105-2-git-send-email-s-anna@ti.com> <20150115135201.GG16217@leverpostej> <20150115135556.GH16217@leverpostej> <20150116101746.GA21809@leverpostej> <20150120180548.GK7718@atomide.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-omap-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Ohad Ben-Cohen , Tony Lindgren Cc: Mark Rutland , Rob Herring , Kumar Gala , Bjorn Andersson , Josh Cartwright , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-omap@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , Rob Herring List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On 01/21/2015 06:41 AM, Ohad Ben-Cohen wrote: > On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 8:05 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote: >> How about default to Linux id space and allow overriding that with >> a module param option if needed? > > I'm not sure I'm following. > > If the main point of contention is the base_id field, I'm also fine > with removing it entirely, as I'm not aware of any actual user for it > (Suman please confirm?). Yeah, well the current implementations that I am aware of only have a single bank, so all of them would be using a value of 0. I am yet to see a platform with multiple instances where the property really makes a difference. v7 has the property mandatory, so all the implementations would need to define this value even if it is 0. regards Suman > > Mark? Rob? Will you accept Suman's patches if the base_id field is removed? > > Thanks, > Ohad. >