From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gate.crashing.org (gate.crashing.org [63.228.1.57]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4B7B6DE267 for ; Tue, 1 Jul 2008 02:55:56 +1000 (EST) In-Reply-To: <20080630110410.7ee097ed.kim.phillips@freescale.com> References: <20080627115243.d76e0814.kim.phillips@freescale.com> <2b97f7566925ed86b78b364ff5724644@kernel.crashing.org> <20080630110410.7ee097ed.kim.phillips@freescale.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v623) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Message-Id: From: Segher Boessenkool Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] update crypto node definition and device tree instances Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2008 18:55:34 +0200 To: Kim Phillips Cc: linuxppc-dev List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , >> Also, these made-up names make you do more work: you'll need to > > who said they were made up? I did. These names do not refer to some physical part you can buy. >> write up a binding for them, explaining exactly what a 1.0 device >> etc. is (or at least point to documentation for it). If you use >> a name that refers to some device that people can easily google >> for documentation, you can skip this (well, you might need to >> write a binding anyway; but at least you won't have to explain >> what the device _is_). > > documentation is available in the usual places, and it specifically > points out which SEC version it references. I can't find a manual online for "freescale sec"; googling for "freescale sec-1.0" finds a manual for the PowerQUICC I; is that the right one? I don't know, so the binding needs to explain it to me. Going from SoC name -> SEC version is easy, but the other way around not so. Anyway, minor stuff. > Plus, as I mentioned > before, a lot of the differences between the SEC versions are miniscule > feature bits scattered across the programming model. I don't see how this is relevant, sorry. >> Using actual model names also reduces the namespace pollution >> (hopefully Freescale will not create some other MPC8272 device >> ever, so "fsl,mpc8272-whatever" will never be a nice name to >> use for any other device; OTOH, it's likely that Freescale will >> create some other device called "SEC" (there are only so many >> TLAs, after all), so "fsl,sec-n.m" isn't as future-proof. > > I doubt that; the SEC has been around for about a decade now and that > hasn't happened. You'll have to admit a three-letter acronym is a bigger namespace squatter than a nice long name is. But it's your namespace, I don't care. i tried googling for "freescale sec" to find any other devices called SEC, but that didn't work out. What is "insider trading"? ;-) Segher