Subject: [PATCH 7/9] ARM: sunxi: dt: Add PLL2 support

From: [email-masked] (Emilio López)
Date: Sun, 03 Aug 2014 19:15:00 -0300

Hi,

El 03/08/14 a las 12:55, Chen-Yu Tsai escibi?:
> On Sun, Aug 3, 2014 at 8:50 PM, Maxime Ripard
> <[email-masked]> wrote:
>> On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 05:46:09PM -0400, jonsmirl at gmail.com wrote:
>>> Would it be better to name this "allwinner,sun4i-a10-pll2-clk" instead
>>> of "allwinner,sun4i-a10-b-pll2-clk"? By encoding the b in it everyone
>>> is going to wonder what to do on the 'c' revision which is the most
>>> common revision.
>>
>> Not really, the way we works usually is that the compatible is the one
>> from the first SoC that implemented that IP. If the rev C has the same
>> IP than rev B, then we're using the rev B compatible.
>>
>>>
>>> The revision based rename would then be from
>>> "allwinner,sun4i-a10-pll2-clk" to "allwinner,sun4i-a10-a-pll2-clk".
>>
>> Though, I'd agree with you. We should have a single compatible in the
>> DT, a generic one, that would trigger the auto-detection, and might
>> change it to the rev A one, but the rev B doesn't make much sense.
>
> I agree. The rev B would make people reading the DT wonder what happened
> to rev A.

Would you like to see "allwinner,sun4i-a10-pll2-clk" on the DT then? 
Should we document it as a magic property triggering an autodetect on 
the clock binding document?

Cheers!

Emilio