From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from e4.ny.us.ibm.com (e4.ny.us.ibm.com [32.97.182.144]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "e4.ny.us.ibm.com", Issuer "Equifax" (verified OK)) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E2D9EDDDF7 for ; Fri, 9 Nov 2007 06:33:43 +1100 (EST) Received: from d01relay04.pok.ibm.com (d01relay04.pok.ibm.com [9.56.227.236]) by e4.ny.us.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id lA8JXenm004821 for ; Thu, 8 Nov 2007 14:33:40 -0500 Received: from d01av01.pok.ibm.com (d01av01.pok.ibm.com [9.56.224.215]) by d01relay04.pok.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v8.5) with ESMTP id lA8JXefo085492 for ; Thu, 8 Nov 2007 14:33:40 -0500 Received: from d01av01.pok.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d01av01.pok.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.13.3) with ESMTP id lA8JXel9018407 for ; Thu, 8 Nov 2007 14:33:40 -0500 Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2007 13:33:34 -0600 From: Josh Boyer To: Jon Loeliger Subject: Re: DTS Bytestrings Representation in /dts-v1/ files Message-ID: <20071108133334.2aa3cef1@zod.rchland.ibm.com> In-Reply-To: References: <20071106231120.GG31367@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Thu, 08 Nov 2007 13:18:50 -0600 Jon Loeliger wrote: > > Folks, > > When the new DTS /dts-v1/ support is released Real Soon Now, > it will support C-like literal constants. Hex values will be > prefixed with 0x, binary with 0b, and bare numbers will be > decimal unless they start with a leading 0. > > One outstanding question on which I'd like some feedback > is the issue of bytestring value representation. > > Currently they look like this: > > stuff = [ 0b 31 22 de ea ad be ef ]; > > One opinion is to have them continue to look like that > and be in hex only. > > Another opinion is to allow the new, consistent C-style > literals and expressions so that one could have: > > new_stuff = [ 0x31 49 '1' 23 17 ]; > > Opinions? My off-the-cuff opinion is to leave them as they are today. They seem to mostly be used for MAC addresses, and you don't really see a whole lot of those with the 0x prefix before every number. At the same time, inconsistency sucks. josh