[U-Boot] [PATCH v2 4/7] tegra: fdt: Add NAND controller binding and definitions

[Stephen Warren <swarren@wwwdotorg.org>]

On 04/13/2012 03:21 PM, Scott Wood wrote:
> On 04/13/2012 03:58 PM, Stephen Warren wrote:
>> On 04/13/2012 12:43 PM, Scott Wood wrote:
>>> On 04/13/2012 01:29 PM, Simon Glass wrote:
>>>> Add a NAND controller along with a bindings file for review.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Simon Glass<sjg@chromium.org>
>>
>>>> +++ b/doc/device-tree-bindings/nand/nvidia-nand.txt
>>
>>>> +wp-gpio : GPIO of write-protect line, three cells in the format:
>>>> +        phandle, parameter, flags
>>>
>>> nvidia,nand-wp-gpio
>>
>> I'm not convinced about this. For example many SDHCI bindings use just
>> "wp-gpios" not "shdci-wp-gpios". Is there really a need to keep the
>> property names unique across all bindings, even though a given node only
>> relies on one binding?
>>
> 
> Yeah, there's a lot of bad practice in the existing trees.  But the
> general recommendation for a while now has been to namespace properties
> that aren't defined in standardized, device-indpendent way.  That way we
> don't get conflicts if we want to use that name for a standard property
> in the future, and there's less confusion if multiple people use the
> same name in different devices with different semantics.

I thought that's what the "nvidia," vendor prefix was for. Presumably
standardized properties wouldn't have that?