From: kgene.kim@samsung•com (Kukjin Kim)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists•infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH V5] ARM: dts: Change i2s compatible string on exynos5250
Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2013 03:05:29 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <52110CE9.8000100@samsung.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1812843.09c8C6xn0E@flatron>
On 08/16/13 16:53, Tomasz Figa wrote:
> Hi Kukjin,
>
[...]
>>>> - compatible = "samsung,i2s-v5";
>>>> + compatible = "samsung,s5pv210-i2s";
>>>
>>> Device tree reviewers, this is something to look out for in the
>>> future. Some samsung platforms/drivers use "samsung,<chip>-<ip>",
>>> others "samsung,<ip>-<chip>". I don't personally care much one way or
>>> another, but it really should be consistent.
>>
>> Hmm...I think, if "samsung,<ip name>-<ip version>" is possible, it would
>> be nice. I remember there are no versions in datasheet for some IPs but
>> something have like i2s and mfc. So "samsung,<ip>-<version>" is used
>> for only i2s and mfc. But actually there are versions for Samsung IPs,
>> no comments for that in datasheet. So I think, if Samsung can provide
>> the specific version of Samsung IPs, we can use that like other
>> platforms. I will prepare some table for that after meeting with
>> Samsung hardware IP team so that samsung platform use one format
>> "samsung,<ip>-<version>".
>
> Sorry, I don't think this is a good idea, unless you can force the IP team
> to release a version table containing version of _every_ IP for _every_
> released SoC, including those historical ones, like S3C24xx and S3C64xx.
> Of course such tables should be available publicly.
>
It's different issue and I agree with Mark Brown's comments.
> In addition, there might be other funny things going on with IPs and their
> surroundings, that could make a need to create several separate compatible
> values for the same IP revision, but on different SoCs, because it was
> integrated in a slightly different way.
>
> I believe we have choses the "samsung,<chip>-<ip>" scheme to avoid being
> dependent upon data that is not always publicly available, which is more
> future- (and past-) proof and also solves the integration problem.
>
Well, I don't think so, because Samsung is no more just SoC vendor.
Actually Samsung is providing just IP to customers, I think, they don't
like to use the name, exynos**** for their SoC or Chip, because exynos,
s3c or s5p whatever is Samsung's SoC brand name. If so, I think, my
suggestion is more reasonable. See the example of Synopsys and ARM
primecell...that's why I will try to do it. But I know I need to get
agreement from DT guys and maybe I need more time than I expect ;-)
Thanks,
Kukjin
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-08-18 18:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-08-16 4:26 [PATCH V5] ARM: dts: Change i2s compatible string on exynos5250 Padmavathi Venna
2013-08-16 4:48 ` Olof Johansson
2013-08-16 5:43 ` Kukjin Kim
2013-08-16 7:53 ` Tomasz Figa
2013-08-16 9:59 ` Mark Brown
2013-08-18 18:05 ` Kukjin Kim [this message]
2013-08-16 7:48 ` Tomasz Figa
2013-08-16 10:06 ` Mark Brown
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=52110CE9.8000100@samsung.com \
--to=kgene.kim@samsung$(echo .)com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists$(echo .)infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox