Re: [PATCH v3 0/4] powerpc: Open PIC binding and "pic-no-reset"

[Scott Wood <scottwood@freescale.com>]

On Fri, 11 Feb 2011 14:58:13 +0000
Yoder Stuart-B08248 <B08248@freescale.com> wrote:

>=20
>=20
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Meador Inge [mailto:meadori@gmail.com]
> > Sent: Thursday, February 10, 2011 9:26 PM
> > To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt
> > Cc: Yoder Stuart-B08248; devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org; linuxppc-
> > dev@lists.ozlabs.org
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/4] powerpc: Open PIC binding and "pic-no-reset"
> >=20
> > From the feedback I have received so far, the fundamental ideas in this
> > patch set are sane. =C2=A0However, the following issues still need agre=
ement:
> >=20
> >  =C2=A0 =C2=A01. What should be the name of the no reset property?
> >  =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 "pic-no-reset" or "no-reset"?
> >  =C2=A0 =C2=A02. Should we just keep the existing protected sources imp=
lementation
> >  =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 in place?
> >=20
> > For (1), I prefer "no-reset".
>=20
> I also prefer plain "no-reset".  The property is on a pic node so
> "pic" on the property seems redundant.

It's not redundant, it's namespacing.  Before there was a generic "status"
property, someone who wanted a device-specific "status" could have made
the same argument.  Usually we use a vendor prefix to avoid that problem,
but that won't work here.

-Scott