* Re: [PATCH 01/17] ARM: shmobile: r8a73a4: fixup DT node naming for SDHI
2013-10-15 7:44 [PATCH 01/17] ARM: shmobile: r8a73a4: fixup DT node naming for SDHI Kuninori Morimoto
@ 2013-10-15 13:26 ` Sergei Shtylyov
2013-10-16 0:47 ` Simon Horman
` (5 subsequent siblings)
6 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Sergei Shtylyov @ 2013-10-15 13:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-sh
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
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH 01/17] ARM: shmobile: r8a73a4: fixup DT node naming for SDHI
2013-10-15 7:44 [PATCH 01/17] ARM: shmobile: r8a73a4: fixup DT node naming for SDHI Kuninori Morimoto
2013-10-15 13:26 ` Sergei Shtylyov
@ 2013-10-16 0:47 ` Simon Horman
2013-10-17 2:49 ` Kuninori Morimoto
` (4 subsequent siblings)
6 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Simon Horman @ 2013-10-16 0:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-sh
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?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH 01/17] ARM: shmobile: r8a73a4: fixup DT node naming for SDHI
2013-10-15 7:44 [PATCH 01/17] ARM: shmobile: r8a73a4: fixup DT node naming for SDHI Kuninori Morimoto
2013-10-15 13:26 ` Sergei Shtylyov
2013-10-16 0:47 ` Simon Horman
@ 2013-10-17 2:49 ` Kuninori Morimoto
2013-10-21 1:55 ` Kuninori Morimoto
` (3 subsequent siblings)
6 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Kuninori Morimoto @ 2013-10-17 2:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-sh
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
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH 01/17] ARM: shmobile: r8a73a4: fixup DT node naming for SDHI
2013-10-15 7:44 [PATCH 01/17] ARM: shmobile: r8a73a4: fixup DT node naming for SDHI Kuninori Morimoto
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2013-10-17 2:49 ` Kuninori Morimoto
@ 2013-10-21 1:55 ` Kuninori Morimoto
2013-10-21 13:09 ` Sergei Shtylyov
` (2 subsequent siblings)
6 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Kuninori Morimoto @ 2013-10-21 1:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-sh
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
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH 01/17] ARM: shmobile: r8a73a4: fixup DT node naming for SDHI
2013-10-15 7:44 [PATCH 01/17] ARM: shmobile: r8a73a4: fixup DT node naming for SDHI Kuninori Morimoto
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2013-10-21 1:55 ` Kuninori Morimoto
@ 2013-10-21 13:09 ` Sergei Shtylyov
2013-10-29 4:43 ` Simon Horman
2013-10-29 5:16 ` Simon Horman
6 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Sergei Shtylyov @ 2013-10-21 13:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-sh
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
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH 01/17] ARM: shmobile: r8a73a4: fixup DT node naming for SDHI
2013-10-15 7:44 [PATCH 01/17] ARM: shmobile: r8a73a4: fixup DT node naming for SDHI Kuninori Morimoto
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2013-10-21 13:09 ` Sergei Shtylyov
@ 2013-10-29 4:43 ` Simon Horman
2013-10-29 5:16 ` Simon Horman
6 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Simon Horman @ 2013-10-29 4:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-sh
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?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH 01/17] ARM: shmobile: r8a73a4: fixup DT node naming for SDHI
2013-10-15 7:44 [PATCH 01/17] ARM: shmobile: r8a73a4: fixup DT node naming for SDHI Kuninori Morimoto
` (5 preceding siblings ...)
2013-10-29 4:43 ` Simon Horman
@ 2013-10-29 5:16 ` Simon Horman
6 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Simon Horman @ 2013-10-29 5:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-sh
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.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread