On Sun, Apr 29, 2018 at 02:08:07PM -0700, Wesley Terpstra wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 29, 2018 at 2:01 PM, Andreas Färber <afaerber@suse.de> wrote:
> > "pwm0" sounds like a zero-indexed instance of some pwm block. If 0 is
> > the version here, I'd suggest to make it "pwm-0" for example - you might
> > want to take a look at the Xilinx bindings, which use a strict x.yy suffix.
> 
> That's fine. I'll change it to pwm-0.00 in the next patch series.

This should match the version that you use. If you're internal
versioning uses single digits, or a single version number, then I think
there's no need to use 0.00, because that would just be confusing.
However I think it'd be good to make sure it is discernible as a version
number. Perhaps something like sifive,pwm-v0. That seems to be a fairly
common scheme.

Thierry