From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Message-ID: <4D54986A.60907@mentor.com> Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2011 20:01:14 -0600 From: Meador Inge MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/4] powerpc: Open PIC binding and "pic-no-reset" References: <1296861941-3370-1-git-send-email-meador_inge@mentor.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Cc: "devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org" , "linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org" List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , From the feedback I have received so far, the fundamental ideas in this patch set are sane. However, the following issues are still outstanding: 1. What is the name of the no reset property? "pic-no-reset" or "no-reset"? 2. Should we just keep the existing protected sources implementation in place? For (1), I am fine with either. For (2), I still think that we can make "pic-no-reset" a synonym for "protected-sources" and that things will work out. On 02/10/2011 02:42 PM, Meador Inge wrote: > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Meador Inge > Date: Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 5:25 PM > Subject: [PATCH v3 0/4] powerpc: Open PIC binding and "pic-no-reset" > To: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org > Cc: devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org, Hollis Blanchard< > hollis_blanchard@mentor.com> > > > This patch set provides a binding for Open PIC and implements support for > a new property, specified by that binding, called "pic-no-reset". With > "pic-no-reset" in place the "protected-sources" property is no longer needed > and its full implementation was removed. "protected-sources" is still > checked > for, however, for legacy purposes. > > For v3 of this patch the Open PIC binding was changed to be more consistent > with existing bindings, several DTS files were cleaned up, "no-reset" was > changed to "pic-no-reset", and a check to treat "protected-sources" as a > synonym for "pic-no-reset" was added. > From the feedback I have received so far, the fundamental ideas in this patch set are sane. However, the following issues still need agreement: 1. What should be the name of the no reset property? "pic-no-reset" or "no-reset"? 2. Should we just keep the existing protected sources implementation in place? For (1), I prefer "no-reset". For (2), I still think that we can make "no-reset" a synonym for "protected-sources" and that things will work out. Ben, you said that you would really like to leave the protected sources implementation alone. Is the mechanism implemented in "PATCH v3 3/4" [1] of having "protected-sources" as a synonym for "pic-no-reset" not suitable? [1] http://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-dev/2011-February/088262.html -- Meador Inge | meador_inge AT mentor.com Mentor Embedded | http://www.mentor.com/embedded-software