On Wed, Jan 2, 2013 at 4:20 PM, Kukjin Kim <[email protected]> wrote: > From: Thomas Abraham <[email protected]> > > Fix the incorrect compatible property value of pin-controller module > EXYNOS5440 SoC. > > Signed-off-by: Thomas Abraham <[email protected]> > Cc: Linus Walleij <[email protected]> > Cc: Grant Likely <[email protected]> > [[email protected]: fixed it in gpio together for exynos5440] > Signed-off-by: Kukjin Kim <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected] > --- > arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5440.dtsi | 2 +- > drivers/gpio/gpio-samsung.c | 2 +- > 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5440.dtsi > b/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5440.dtsi > index 024269d..25f0fa6 100644 > --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5440.dtsi > +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5440.dtsi > @@ -86,7 +86,7 @@ > }; > > pinctrl { > - compatible = "samsung,pinctrl-exynos5440"; > + compatible = "samsung,exynos5440-pinctrl"; > reg = <0xE0000 0x1000>; > interrupt-controller; > #interrupt-cells = <2>; > diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpio-samsung.c b/drivers/gpio/gpio-samsung.c > index 953737d..cac4b45 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpio/gpio-samsung.c > +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpio-samsung.c > @@ -3026,7 +3026,7 @@ static __init int samsung_gpiolib_init(void) > static const struct of_device_id exynos_pinctrl_ids[] = { > { .compatible = "samsung,pinctrl-exynos4210", }, > { .compatible = "samsung,pinctrl-exynos4x12", }, > - { .compatible = "samsung,pinctrl-exynos5440", }, > + { .compatible = "samsung,exynos5440-pinctrl", },
Uugh. There's something to be said about consistency, even if it's possibly not 100% correct. Is it really worth it to have 5440 be the only one with the "right" naming here? -Olof -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
