From: Scott Wood <scottwood@freescale.com>
To: Wolfgang Grandegger <wg@grandegger.com>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org,
"Devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org"
<Devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org>,
U Bhaskar-B22300 <B22300@freescale.com>,
socketcan-core@lists.berlios.de, Robin Holt <holt@sgi.com>,
PPC list <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] [powerpc] Fix up fsl-flexcan device tree binding.
Date: Tue, 9 Aug 2011 15:11:25 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4E41946D.4030003@freescale.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4E418B39.6040408@grandegger.com>
On 08/09/2011 02:32 PM, Wolfgang Grandegger wrote:
> On 08/09/2011 08:17 PM, Scott Wood wrote:
>> On 08/09/2011 09:43 AM, Robin Holt wrote:
>>> In working with the socketcan developers, we have come to the conclusion
>>> the fsl-flexcan device tree bindings need to be cleaned up.
>>> The driver does not depend upon any properties other than the required properties
>>> so we are removing the file.
>>
>> That is not the criterion for whether something should be expresed in
>> the device tree. It's a description of the hardware, not a Linux driver
>> configuration file. If there are integration parameters that can not be
>> inferred from "this is FSL flexcan v1.0", they should be expressed in
>> the node.
>>
>> Removing the binding altogether seems extreme as well -- we should have
>> bindings for all devices, even if there are no special properties.
>
> Yes, of course. The commit message misleading. We do not intend to
> remove the binding but just a few unused and confusing properties.
Is it a matter of the current driver not caring, or the properties just
not making sense for any reasonable driver (ambiguous, inferrable from
the flexcan version, software configuration, etc)?
-Scott
prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-08-09 20:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-08-09 14:43 [Patch 0/5] [flexcan/powerpc] Add support for powerpc flexcan (freescale p1010) -V9 Robin Holt
2011-08-09 14:43 ` [PATCH 1/5] [flexcan] Remove #include <mach/clock.h> Robin Holt
2011-08-09 14:43 ` [PATCH 2/5] [flexcan] Abstract off read/write for big/little endian Robin Holt
2011-08-09 14:43 ` [PATCH 3/5] [flexcan] Add of_match to platform_device definition Robin Holt
2011-08-09 14:43 ` [PATCH 4/5] [powerpc] Add flexcan device support for p1010rdb Robin Holt
2011-08-09 14:43 ` [PATCH 5/5] [powerpc] Fix up fsl-flexcan device tree binding Robin Holt
2011-08-09 18:17 ` Scott Wood
2011-08-09 18:45 ` Robin Holt
2011-08-09 19:13 ` Scott Wood
2011-08-09 19:49 ` Wolfgang Grandegger
2011-08-09 19:58 ` Scott Wood
2011-08-09 20:59 ` Robin Holt
2011-08-10 14:52 ` Kumar Gala
2011-08-10 16:16 ` Robin Holt
2011-08-09 19:32 ` Wolfgang Grandegger
2011-08-09 20:11 ` Scott Wood [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4E41946D.4030003@freescale.com \
--to=scottwood@freescale.com \
--cc=B22300@freescale.com \
--cc=Devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=holt@sgi.com \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=socketcan-core@lists.berlios.de \
--cc=wg@grandegger.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).