From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mail-ob0-f180.google.com ([209.85.214.180]:36867 "EHLO mail-ob0-f180.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752190AbaLRINl (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 Dec 2014 03:13:41 -0500 Received: by mail-ob0-f180.google.com with SMTP id wp4so2138981obc.11 for ; Thu, 18 Dec 2014 00:13:39 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2014 08:13:34 +0000 From: Lee Jones To: Arnd Bergmann Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, a.zummo@towertech.it, kernel@stlinux.com, rtc-linux@googlegroups.com, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, wim@iguana.be, linux@roeck-us.net, linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/8] watchdog: bindings: Provide ST bindings for ST's LPC Watchdog device Message-ID: <20141218081334.GO13885@x1> References: <1418834727-1602-1-git-send-email-lee.jones@linaro.org> <1418834727-1602-6-git-send-email-lee.jones@linaro.org> <5479005.CEJLtxOOIa@wuerfel> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE In-Reply-To: <5479005.CEJLtxOOIa@wuerfel> Sender: linux-watchdog-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 17 Dec 2014, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Wednesday 17 December 2014 16:45:24 Lee Jones wrote: > > +- compatible : Must be one of: "st,stih407-lpc" "st,stih416-lpc" > > + "st,stih415-lpc" "st,stid127-lpc" > > +- reg : LPC registers base address + size > > +- interrupts : LPC interrupt line number and associated flags > > +- clocks : Clock used by LPC device (See: ../clock/clock-bin= dings.txt) > > +- st,lpc-mode : The LPC can run either one of two modes ST_LPC_MO= DE_RTC [0] or > > + ST_LPC_MODE_WDT [1]. One (and only one) mode mus= t be > > + selected. > >=20 >=20 > I'm glad you got it to work with two drivers for the same device. >=20 > With this binding, I'm still a bit unhappy about the st,lpc-mode prop= erty, > in particular since you rely on a shared include file for something t= hat > can only be set in one way or another and always has to be present. >=20 > Why not just use a boolean property that enforces one mode when prese= nt > and another mode when absent? There is nothing stopping me from doing that, and it was a consideration. I concluded that this method would be more explicit however. Both when describing our choices in DT and at a functional level within each of the drivers. Let me know if you fundamentally disagree and I can fix-up. --=20 Lee Jones Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead Linaro.org =E2=94=82 Open source software for ARM SoCs =46ollow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-watchdo= g" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html