From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752691Ab3HENM0 (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 Aug 2013 09:12:26 -0400 Received: from mail-bk0-f53.google.com ([209.85.214.53]:34815 "EHLO mail-bk0-f53.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751230Ab3HENMY (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 Aug 2013 09:12:24 -0400 Message-ID: <51FFA4B4.5080807@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 05 Aug 2013 15:12:20 +0200 From: Sebastian Hesselbarth User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:17.0) Gecko/17.0 Thunderbird/17.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jason Cooper CC: Mark Rutland , Thomas Petazzoni , Andrew Lunn , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] ARM: remove dmacap,memset from Device tree binding References: <1372762453-12018-1-git-send-email-sebastian.hesselbarth@gmail.com> <1372762453-12018-2-git-send-email-sebastian.hesselbarth@gmail.com> <20130725153104.GH23879@titan.lakedaemon.net> <20130804010904.GB19280@titan.lakedaemon.net> <20130805095341.GA7594@e106331-lin.cambridge.arm.com> <20130805122638.GE19280@titan.lakedaemon.net> In-Reply-To: <20130805122638.GE19280@titan.lakedaemon.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 08/05/13 14:26, Jason Cooper wrote: > On Mon, Aug 05, 2013 at 10:53:41AM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote: >> I'm not entirely sure on this. The property described is still true for >> the device, even if the kernel's not using that information now. My >> feeling would be to keep them, unless there's a plan to better describe >> the properties of the XOR channels. >> >> It shouldn't harm the kernel to have some properties we don't use at >> this point in time. If we want to reorganise the binding, the first step >> would be to make the properties as deprecated, rather than removing them >> outright. > > Ok, that matches what I was originally thinking. The bindings are > supposed to be OS-agnostic, so the fact that we no longer use it is > irrelevant. The hardware still has the capability. > > Sebastian, I'm just going to drop this patch. Sure, I am fine with dropping it. Sebastian