[PATCH 01/17] ARM: shmobile: r8a73a4: fixup DT node naming for SDHI

[PATCH 01/17] ARM: shmobile: r8a73a4: fixup DT node naming for SDHI

[Kuninori Morimoto]

According to ePAPR spec,
this patch exchanges SDHI DT node from "sdhi" to "sd".

Signed-off-by: Kuninori Morimoto <kuninori.morimoto.gx@renesas.com>
---
 arch/arm/boot/dts/r8a73a4-ape6evm-reference.dts |   16 ++++++++--------
 arch/arm/boot/dts/r8a73a4.dtsi                  |    6 +++---
 2 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/r8a73a4-ape6evm-reference.dts b/arch/arm/boot/dts/r8a73a4-ape6evm-reference.dts
index 9443e93..27ce4ac 100644
--- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/r8a73a4-ape6evm-reference.dts
+++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/r8a73a4-ape6evm-reference.dts
@@ -33,7 +33,7 @@
 		regulator-always-on;
 	};
 
-	vcc_sdhi0: regulator@1 {
+	vcc_sd0: regulator@1 {
 		compatible = "regulator-fixed";
 
 		regulator-name = "SDHI0 Vcc";
@@ -98,12 +98,12 @@
 		renesas,function = "mmc0";
 	};
 
-	sdhi0_pins: sdhi0 {
+	sd0_pins: sd0 {
 		renesas,groups = "sdhi0_data4", "sdhi0_ctrl", "sdhi0_cd";
 		renesas,function = "sdhi0";
 	};
 
-	sdhi1_pins: sdhi1 {
+	sd1_pins: sd1 {
 		renesas,groups = "sdhi1_data4", "sdhi1_ctrl";
 		renesas,function = "sdhi1";
 	};
@@ -118,21 +118,21 @@
 	status = "okay";
 };
 
-&sdhi0 {
-	vmmc-supply = <&vcc_sdhi0>;
+&sd0 {
+	vmmc-supply = <&vcc_sd0>;
 	bus-width = <4>;
 	toshiba,mmc-wrprotect-disable;
 	pinctrl-names = "default";
-	pinctrl-0 = <&sdhi0_pins>;
+	pinctrl-0 = <&sd0_pins>;
 	status = "okay";
 };
 
-&sdhi1 {
+&sd1 {
 	vmmc-supply = <&ape6evm_fixed_3v3>;
 	bus-width = <4>;
 	broken-cd;
 	toshiba,mmc-wrprotect-disable;
 	pinctrl-names = "default";
-	pinctrl-0 = <&sdhi1_pins>;
+	pinctrl-0 = <&sd1_pins>;
 	status = "okay";
 };
diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/r8a73a4.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/r8a73a4.dtsi
index 287e047..447c128 100644
--- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/r8a73a4.dtsi
+++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/r8a73a4.dtsi
@@ -244,7 +244,7 @@
 		#gpio-cells = <2>;
 	};
 
-	sdhi0: sdhi@ee100000 {
+	sd0: sd@ee100000 {
 		compatible = "renesas,sdhi-r8a73a4";
 		reg = <0 0xee100000 0 0x100>;
 		interrupt-parent = <&gic>;
@@ -253,7 +253,7 @@
 		status = "disabled";
 	};
 
-	sdhi1: sdhi@ee120000 {
+	sd1: sd@ee120000 {
 		compatible = "renesas,sdhi-r8a73a4";
 		reg = <0 0xee120000 0 0x100>;
 		interrupt-parent = <&gic>;
@@ -262,7 +262,7 @@
 		status = "disabled";
 	};
 
-	sdhi2: sdhi@ee140000 {
+	sd2: sd@ee140000 {
 		compatible = "renesas,sdhi-r8a73a4";
 		reg = <0 0xee140000 0 0x100>;
 		interrupt-parent = <&gic>;
-- 
1.7.9.5

Re: [PATCH 01/17] ARM: shmobile: r8a73a4: fixup DT node naming for SDHI

[Sergei Shtylyov]

Hello.

On 15-10-2013 11:44, Kuninori Morimoto wrote:

> According to ePAPR spec,
> this patch exchanges SDHI DT node from "sdhi" to "sd".

> Signed-off-by: Kuninori Morimoto <kuninori.morimoto.gx@renesas.com>
> ---
>   arch/arm/boot/dts/r8a73a4-ape6evm-reference.dts |   16 ++++++++--------
>   arch/arm/boot/dts/r8a73a4.dtsi                  |    6 +++---
>   2 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)

> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/r8a73a4.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/r8a73a4.dtsi
> index 287e047..447c128 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/r8a73a4.dtsi
> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/r8a73a4.dtsi
> @@ -244,7 +244,7 @@
>   		#gpio-cells = <2>;
>   	};
>
> -	sdhi0: sdhi@ee100000 {
> +	sd0: sd@ee100000 {

    Having to change the node names doesn't mean you need to change the labels 
too (and PFC-related node names too). In fact, I think the existing labels are 
better.

WBR, Sergei

Re: [PATCH 01/17] ARM: shmobile: r8a73a4: fixup DT node naming for SDHI

[Simon Horman]

On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 05:26:12PM +0400, Sergei Shtylyov wrote:
> Hello.
> 
> On 15-10-2013 11:44, Kuninori Morimoto wrote:
> 
> >According to ePAPR spec,
> >this patch exchanges SDHI DT node from "sdhi" to "sd".
> 
> >Signed-off-by: Kuninori Morimoto <kuninori.morimoto.gx@renesas.com>
> >---
> >  arch/arm/boot/dts/r8a73a4-ape6evm-reference.dts |   16 ++++++++--------
> >  arch/arm/boot/dts/r8a73a4.dtsi                  |    6 +++---
> >  2 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
> 
> >diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/r8a73a4.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/r8a73a4.dtsi
> >index 287e047..447c128 100644
> >--- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/r8a73a4.dtsi
> >+++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/r8a73a4.dtsi
> >@@ -244,7 +244,7 @@
> >  		#gpio-cells = <2>;
> >  	};
> >
> >-	sdhi0: sdhi@ee100000 {
> >+	sd0: sd@ee100000 {
> 
>    Having to change the node names doesn't mean you need to change
> the labels too (and PFC-related node names too). In fact, I think
> the existing labels are better.

My, this is tedious.

Looking at other dts files I see a lot of entries
of the form "mmcX: mmc@...". And I think that Morimoto-san's patches
are in keeping with that style.

On the other hand, I see your point that its much clearer
to use sdhi0 as that is what the hw manuals refer to and
it would allow differentiation with mmcif.

So I lean towards Sergei's suggestion being a bit nicer.

Morimoto-san, what is your feeling on this?

Re: [PATCH 01/17] ARM: shmobile: r8a73a4: fixup DT node naming for SDHI

[Kuninori Morimoto]

Hi Simon, Sergei

> > >-	sdhi0: sdhi@ee100000 {
> > >+	sd0: sd@ee100000 {
> > 
> >    Having to change the node names doesn't mean you need to change
> > the labels too (and PFC-related node names too). In fact, I think
> > the existing labels are better.
> 
> My, this is tedious.
> 
> Looking at other dts files I see a lot of entries
> of the form "mmcX: mmc@...". And I think that Morimoto-san's patches
> are in keeping with that style.
> 
> On the other hand, I see your point that its much clearer
> to use sdhi0 as that is what the hw manuals refer to and
> it would allow differentiation with mmcif.
> 
> So I lean towards Sergei's suggestion being a bit nicer.
> 
> Morimoto-san, what is your feeling on this?

I don't know.
Actually, I don't have any interesting about
this kind of non-technical patches.

I don't want sending many patches in many times.
So, please show me your concretely favored style.
like this ?

	sdhi0: sd@ee100000 {

Best regards
---
Kuninori Morimoto

Re: [PATCH 01/17] ARM: shmobile: r8a73a4: fixup DT node naming for SDHI

[Kuninori Morimoto]

ping to Sergei

> Hi Simon, Sergei
> 
> > > >-	sdhi0: sdhi@ee100000 {
> > > >+	sd0: sd@ee100000 {
> > > 
> > >    Having to change the node names doesn't mean you need to change
> > > the labels too (and PFC-related node names too). In fact, I think
> > > the existing labels are better.
> > 
> > My, this is tedious.
> > 
> > Looking at other dts files I see a lot of entries
> > of the form "mmcX: mmc@...". And I think that Morimoto-san's patches
> > are in keeping with that style.
> > 
> > On the other hand, I see your point that its much clearer
> > to use sdhi0 as that is what the hw manuals refer to and
> > it would allow differentiation with mmcif.
> > 
> > So I lean towards Sergei's suggestion being a bit nicer.
> > 
> > Morimoto-san, what is your feeling on this?
> 
> I don't know.
> Actually, I don't have any interesting about
> this kind of non-technical patches.
> 
> I don't want sending many patches in many times.
> So, please show me your concretely favored style.
> like this ?
> 
> 	sdhi0: sd@ee100000 {
> 
> Best regards
> ---
> Kuninori Morimoto

Re: [PATCH 01/17] ARM: shmobile: r8a73a4: fixup DT node naming for SDHI

[Sergei Shtylyov]

Hello.

On 10/17/2013 06:49 AM, Kuninori Morimoto wrote:

>>>> -	sdhi0: sdhi@ee100000 {
>>>> +	sd0: sd@ee100000 {

>>>     Having to change the node names doesn't mean you need to change
>>> the labels too (and PFC-related node names too). In fact, I think
>>> the existing labels are better.

>> My, this is tedious.

>> Looking at other dts files I see a lot of entries
>> of the form "mmcX: mmc@...". And I think that Morimoto-san's patches
>> are in keeping with that style.

>> On the other hand, I see your point that its much clearer
>> to use sdhi0 as that is what the hw manuals refer to and
>> it would allow differentiation with mmcif.

>> So I lean towards Sergei's suggestion being a bit nicer.

>> Morimoto-san, what is your feeling on this?

> I don't know.
> Actually, I don't have any interesting about
> this kind of non-technical patches.

> I don't want sending many patches in many times.
> So, please show me your concretely favored style.
> like this ?

> 	sdhi0: sd@ee100000 {

    I thought you were asking Simon. Yes, this is the style I'd prefer.

> Best regards
> ---
> Kuninori Morimoto

WBR, Sergei

Re: [PATCH 01/17] ARM: shmobile: r8a73a4: fixup DT node naming for SDHI

[Simon Horman]

On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 05:09:46PM +0400, Sergei Shtylyov wrote:
> Hello.
> 
> On 10/17/2013 06:49 AM, Kuninori Morimoto wrote:
> 
> >>>>-	sdhi0: sdhi@ee100000 {
> >>>>+	sd0: sd@ee100000 {
> 
> >>>    Having to change the node names doesn't mean you need to change
> >>>the labels too (and PFC-related node names too). In fact, I think
> >>>the existing labels are better.
> 
> >>My, this is tedious.
> 
> >>Looking at other dts files I see a lot of entries
> >>of the form "mmcX: mmc@...". And I think that Morimoto-san's patches
> >>are in keeping with that style.
> 
> >>On the other hand, I see your point that its much clearer
> >>to use sdhi0 as that is what the hw manuals refer to and
> >>it would allow differentiation with mmcif.
> 
> >>So I lean towards Sergei's suggestion being a bit nicer.
> 
> >>Morimoto-san, what is your feeling on this?
> 
> >I don't know.
> >Actually, I don't have any interesting about
> >this kind of non-technical patches.
> 
> >I don't want sending many patches in many times.
> >So, please show me your concretely favored style.
> >like this ?
> 
> >	sdhi0: sd@ee100000 {
> 
>    I thought you were asking Simon. Yes, this is the style I'd prefer.

That is fine by me.

Morimoto-san, would you care to refresh the series?

Re: [PATCH 01/17] ARM: shmobile: r8a73a4: fixup DT node naming for SDHI

[Simon Horman]

On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 01:43:46PM +0900, Simon Horman wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 05:09:46PM +0400, Sergei Shtylyov wrote:
> > Hello.
> > 
> > On 10/17/2013 06:49 AM, Kuninori Morimoto wrote:
> > 
> > >>>>-	sdhi0: sdhi@ee100000 {
> > >>>>+	sd0: sd@ee100000 {
> > 
> > >>>    Having to change the node names doesn't mean you need to change
> > >>>the labels too (and PFC-related node names too). In fact, I think
> > >>>the existing labels are better.
> > 
> > >>My, this is tedious.
> > 
> > >>Looking at other dts files I see a lot of entries
> > >>of the form "mmcX: mmc@...". And I think that Morimoto-san's patches
> > >>are in keeping with that style.
> > 
> > >>On the other hand, I see your point that its much clearer
> > >>to use sdhi0 as that is what the hw manuals refer to and
> > >>it would allow differentiation with mmcif.
> > 
> > >>So I lean towards Sergei's suggestion being a bit nicer.
> > 
> > >>Morimoto-san, what is your feeling on this?
> > 
> > >I don't know.
> > >Actually, I don't have any interesting about
> > >this kind of non-technical patches.
> > 
> > >I don't want sending many patches in many times.
> > >So, please show me your concretely favored style.
> > >like this ?
> > 
> > >	sdhi0: sd@ee100000 {
> > 
> >    I thought you were asking Simon. Yes, this is the style I'd prefer.
> 
> That is fine by me.
> 
> Morimoto-san, would you care to refresh the series?

I see that you already have.