On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 07:23:06AM +0900, Magnus Damm wrote: > Hi Guennadi, > > On Mon, Apr 8, 2013 at 5:08 PM, Guennadi Liakhovetski > <[email protected]> wrote: > > Most Renesas irqpin controllers have 4-bit sense fields, however, some > > have different widths. This patch adds a DT binding to optionally > > specify such non-standard values. > > > > Signed-off-by: Guennadi Liakhovetski <[email protected]> > > --- > > > > v3: move the code to a common location, where device configuration > > parameters are retrieved > > Thanks for rearranging the code, this looks good to me. > > Acked-by: Magnus Damm <[email protected]>
Thanks, queued-up in the renesas-intc-irqpin branch. > To be clear, I prefer your approach over a per-SoC compatible string. > > In general I think a per-SoC compatible string is nice in theory, but > I don't think it is correct to use it to describe a change in a IP > block that just happens to included in the SoC. Instead the version of > the IP block shall be used with the compatible value. In some cases it > may not be easy to retrieve such a version. > > The per-SoC compatible string may look good but they come with at > least two drawbacks. Either > 1) the driver has to be updated for each new SoC even though the > device IP the driver is handling hasn't changed which leads to > 1.1) more need for pointless per-SoC compatible string patches to be > merged and tracked and back ported > and > 1.2) less chance of running a standard distro lacking per-SoC > compatible string but has actual code for support > or > 2) to ship soon the per-SoC DT will use SoC compatible strings > matching other SoC names which works but is even more confusing. > > For the INTC irqpin case I believe this approach with a single > property is the best. > > Thanks, > > / magnus > _______________________________________________ devicetree-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/devicetree-discuss
