From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Paul Mundt Subject: Re: [PATCH] i2c: i2c-sh_mobile device tree support Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2012 10:41:13 +0900 Message-ID: <20120419014113.GB22189@linux-sh.org> References: <20120330084402.19597.63655.sendpatchset@w520> <20120330084744.GF26543@linux-sh.org> <20120330090341.GG26543@linux-sh.org> <20120418140839.GD19220@pengutronix.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120418140839.GD19220-bIcnvbaLZ9MEGnE8C9+IrQ@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-i2c-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Wolfram Sang Cc: Magnus Damm , linux-i2c-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, arnd-r2nGTMty4D4@public.gmane.org, linux-sh-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, rjw-KKrjLPT3xs0@public.gmane.org, ben-linux-elnMNo+KYs3YtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org, khali-PUYAD+kWke1g9hUCZPvPmw@public.gmane.org List-Id: linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 04:08:39PM +0200, Wolfram Sang wrote: > Hi Paul, > > > > Of course, if you think it is cramping your SH device tree style then > > > we can easily add a "renesas-shmobile-iic" entry as well. > > > > > I obviously don't mind if you wish to use the rmobile naming convention > > going forward, as the new parts have obviously dropped with the shmobile > > naming convention, and it's likely you'll even be able to infer different > > capabilities between rmobile vs shmobile. That's not sufficient cause to > > prefer one over the other though, so you're still going to have to keep > > things balanced. Simply having two aliases seems to me to be the easiest > > solution. > > "alias" is a second compatible entry here? Is it okay if this is added > with a seperate patch when needed? > Yes, that's fine.