On 16 July 2014 15:46, Arnd Bergmann <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wednesday 16 July 2014 10:40:19 Sudeep Holla wrote: >> > + >> > +Required property: >> > +- mbox: List of phandle and mailbox channel specifier. >> > + >> > +- mbox-names: List of identifier strings for each mailbox channel >> > + required by the client. >> > + >> >> IMO the mailbox names are more associated with the controller channels/ >> mailbox rather than the clients using it. Does it make sense to move >> this under controller. It also avoid each client replicating the names. > > I think it would be best to just make the mbox-names property optional, > like we have for other subsystems. > A very similar subsystem - DMAEngine also has 'dma-names' as a required property.
If a client is assigned only 1 mbox in DT, we can do without mbox-names. But I am not sure what to do if a client needs two or more differently capable mboxes? Simply allocating in order of mbox request doesn't seem very robust. -jassi -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
