From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1754533Ab3H1PBa (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Wed, 28 Aug 2013 11:01:30 -0400
Received: from mail1.bemta5.messagelabs.com ([195.245.231.140]:14645 "EHLO
	mail1.bemta5.messagelabs.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK)
	by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753664Ab3H1PB0 (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Wed, 28 Aug 2013 11:01:26 -0400
X-Env-Sender: Johannes.Thumshirn@men.de
X-Msg-Ref: server-10.tower-180.messagelabs.com!1377702081!30734734!1
X-Originating-IP: [80.255.6.145]
X-StarScan-Received: 
X-StarScan-Version: 6.9.11; banners=-,-,-
X-VirusChecked: Checked
X-PGP-Universal: processed;
	by keys.men.de on Wed, 28 Aug 2013 17:01:21 +0200
Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2013 17:01:12 +0200
From: Johannes Thumshirn <johannes.thumshirn@men.de>
To: Stephen Warren <swarren@wwwdotorg.org>
CC: Johannes Thumshirn <johannes.thumshirn@men.de>,
        Rob Landley <rob@landley.net>, Rob Herring <rob.herring@calxeda.com>,
        Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@arm.com>, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
        Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com>,
        Wim Van Sebroeck <wim@iguana.be>, Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>,
        <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-doc@vger.kernel.org>,
        <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH v2] documentation/devicetree: Move DT bindigns from
 gpio to watchdog
Message-ID: <20130828150112.GA17200@jtlinux>
References: <521672A1.6010202@wwwdotorg.org>
 <1377601837-18989-1-git-send-email-johannes.thumshirn@men.de>
 <521D1D16.9080106@wwwdotorg.org>
 <20130828062232.GA10368@jtlinux>
 <521E0B80.6040302@wwwdotorg.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <521E0B80.6040302@wwwdotorg.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
X-Originating-IP: [192.1.1.31]
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 28 Aug 2013 15:01:21.0312 (UTC) FILETIME=[74DF9200:01CEA3FF]
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 08:38:56AM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote:
> On 08/28/2013 12:22 AM, Johannes Thumshirn wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 03:41:42PM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote:
> >> On 08/27/2013 05:10 AM, Johannes Thumshirn wrote:
> >>> I accidently put the devicetree bindings for the MEN A21 watchdog driver in
> >>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio instead of
> >>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/watchdog, this patch addresses this error.
> >>
> >>>  Changes to v1:
> >>>  - Use named gpios, as suggested by Stephen Warren
> >>
> >> The move and the change to the binding should probably be separate
> >> patches since they're logically separate things. I didn't intend you to
> >> update the rename patch to fix the binding issue I pointed out.
> >>
> >
> > Oops. Looks like I've misunderstood you there. I'll re-send the rename patch
> > then.
> >
> >> Is the driver updated for this binding change? Are there DTs in released
> >> kernels that won't work now, or is the driver very new; there may be a
> >> need for the driver to support the old binding and the binding doc to
> >> document the old gpios property, but mark it deprecated.
> >
> > The driver is not yet updated, this is why I've sent it as an RFC. Are the
> > bindings acceptable this way? If yes I'll update the driver and re-send the
> > bindings with the driver as a new patch series.
>
> Well, XXX says:
>
> > GPIO properties should be named "[<name>-]gpios"
>
> whereas in this patch, some of the renamed properties were "-gpio"
> rather than "-gpios". Aside from that, the new binding looks reasonable.
>
> However, I see that the existing binding will be released as part of
> v3.11. That implies that we should continue to support the old binding
> for compatibility. As such, I'm not convinced whether it's worth
> changing this binding now.

Well I'm be perfectly happy with not changing the bindings and therefore not
changing the driver. If this O.K. for you.

Should I resend my 1st patch, or is it O.K. to pick up the old one?

Johannes

From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Johannes Thumshirn <johannes.thumshirn@men.de>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH v2] documentation/devicetree: Move DT bindigns from
 gpio to watchdog
Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2013 17:01:12 +0200
Message-ID: <20130828150112.GA17200@jtlinux>
References: <521672A1.6010202@wwwdotorg.org>
 <1377601837-18989-1-git-send-email-johannes.thumshirn@men.de>
 <521D1D16.9080106@wwwdotorg.org>
 <20130828062232.GA10368@jtlinux>
 <521E0B80.6040302@wwwdotorg.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Return-path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <521E0B80.6040302@wwwdotorg.org>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
To: Stephen Warren <swarren@wwwdotorg.org>
Cc: Johannes Thumshirn <johannes.thumshirn@men.de>, Rob Landley <rob@landley.net>, Rob Herring <rob.herring@calxeda.com>, Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@arm.com>, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>, Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com>, Wim Van Sebroeck <wim@iguana.be>, Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org

On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 08:38:56AM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote:
> On 08/28/2013 12:22 AM, Johannes Thumshirn wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 03:41:42PM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote:
> >> On 08/27/2013 05:10 AM, Johannes Thumshirn wrote:
> >>> I accidently put the devicetree bindings for the MEN A21 watchdog driver in
> >>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio instead of
> >>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/watchdog, this patch addresses this error.
> >>
> >>>  Changes to v1:
> >>>  - Use named gpios, as suggested by Stephen Warren
> >>
> >> The move and the change to the binding should probably be separate
> >> patches since they're logically separate things. I didn't intend you to
> >> update the rename patch to fix the binding issue I pointed out.
> >>
> >
> > Oops. Looks like I've misunderstood you there. I'll re-send the rename patch
> > then.
> >
> >> Is the driver updated for this binding change? Are there DTs in released
> >> kernels that won't work now, or is the driver very new; there may be a
> >> need for the driver to support the old binding and the binding doc to
> >> document the old gpios property, but mark it deprecated.
> >
> > The driver is not yet updated, this is why I've sent it as an RFC. Are the
> > bindings acceptable this way? If yes I'll update the driver and re-send the
> > bindings with the driver as a new patch series.
>
> Well, XXX says:
>
> > GPIO properties should be named "[<name>-]gpios"
>
> whereas in this patch, some of the renamed properties were "-gpio"
> rather than "-gpios". Aside from that, the new binding looks reasonable.
>
> However, I see that the existing binding will be released as part of
> v3.11. That implies that we should continue to support the old binding
> for compatibility. As such, I'm not convinced whether it's worth
> changing this binding now.

Well I'm be perfectly happy with not changing the bindings and therefore not
changing the driver. If this O.K. for you.

Should I resend my 1st patch, or is it O.K. to pick up the old one?

Johannes