From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ben Gamari Subject: Re: [PATCH] dt: Update I2C trivial devices list Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2014 09:25:32 -0500 Message-ID: <87r48cklgj.fsf@gmail.com> References: <1387239151-19226-1-git-send-email-bgamari.foss@gmail.com> <52B07870.6070809@wwwdotorg.org> <87a9fztofc.fsf@gmail.com> <20140113125128.GE2586@katana> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20140113125128.GE2586@katana> Sender: linux-i2c-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Wolfram Sang Cc: Stephen Warren , linux-i2c-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, devicetree-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, Rob Herring , Pawel Moll , Mark Rutland , Ian Campbell , Kumar Gala List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Wolfram Sang writes: > On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 11:47:19AM -0500, Ben Gamari wrote: >> Stephen Warren writes: >>=20 >> > On 12/16/2013 05:12 PM, Ben Gamari wrote: >> > >> >> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/trivial-devices.tx= t b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/trivial-devices.txt >> > >> >> This is a list of trivial i2c devices that have simple device tree >> >> bindings, consisting only of a compatible field, an address and >> >> -possibly an interrupt line. >> >> +possibly an interrupt line. The compatible field is used to lookup t= he >> >> +modalias of the driver which will handle the device. The compatible >> >> +string may begin with a manufacturer prefix (separated from the >> >> +modalias by a comma) which will be stripped off during lookup. >> > >> > This part of the patch described Linux-specific behaviour, whereas DT >> > bindings should be OS-agnostic. >> > >> I see your point but it would be nice to have language like this >> somewhere. One of the biggest challenges in diving in to writing a >> devicetree is figuring out details like this. > > What about putting this into a seperate paragraph prefixed with "Current > Linux specific implementation:"? > This would address my concern quite nicely. Cheers, =2D Ben --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.14 (GNU/Linux) iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJS0/dcAAoJEErkyLZmeNiDRwMH/irA5DSn95+PVa/75JktBuYn ff1oZHvOj5GDalFkeIWamIpLbG+Hm3Mq0FPGA9JwuJDeRI3rDEeQYGnR+177+nII HGSLDYZsGiWvaWDUDKsuUoDrnjmCtfU7tMyZCfrGzbWlHcMebEjz0Ozvj58bAOTF lZ7d9cgl9TQYVMAP4sX2EQwdNR+X+gwK30LT4cNEYkuGFur5jTk99ByNY1rfd9RV SKARbOnHzmxTefnaxn2VSudRTgnsfTG3jyV8OP427fqP5zUF3yfqSMu2wKyyPdsS 6lyA8TXhAYJAlQiQKws2oWt0+zhgRhjxFenshujwkLY/RK9iUingQUuYE//lQBQ= =swlV -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--