From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752724AbcF3Wui (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Jun 2016 18:50:38 -0400 Received: from gloria.sntech.de ([95.129.55.99]:41708 "EHLO gloria.sntech.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752643AbcF3Wug (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Jun 2016 18:50:36 -0400 From: Heiko Stuebner To: Doug Anderson Cc: Caesar Wang , Xu Jianqun , Brian Norris , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "open list:ARM/Rockchip SoC..." , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" , Elaine Zhang Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: dts: rockchip: add the power domain node for rk3399 Date: Fri, 01 Jul 2016 00:50:06 +0200 Message-ID: <2164835.qn3FrgoRRc@phil> User-Agent: KMail/4.14.10 (Linux/4.3.0-1-amd64; KDE/4.14.14; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: References: <1467251760-14695-1-git-send-email-wxt@rock-chips.com> <2709691.LCsUme3dJo@phil> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Am Donnerstag, 30. Juni 2016, 15:32:01 schrieb Doug Anderson: > Hi, > > On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 2:57 PM, Heiko Stuebner wrote: > >> It looks like there are also more power domains that you haven't > >> listed here (like PD_GMAC, for instance, or PD_CORE_L). Are you > >> planning to add those in a followon patch? > > > > that reminds me, nodes with a reg property should have the base address > > in the node name as well. Using the constant works nicely, as can be > > seen on> > > the rk3288 where we have for example: > > pd_vio@RK3288_PD_VIO > > I was wondering about that. The device tree bindings are similarly > missing the reg from the example. > > I'm curious: for sorting purposes, are you supposed to know the > underlying integer and use that for sorting, or sort by the name of > the #define? requiring the underlying integer sounds very cumbersome, especially as the sorting is only a style-thing. So personally I'd take the constants name as sorting criteria, as everything else would be somewhat counter-intuitive. Heiko From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Heiko Stuebner Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: dts: rockchip: add the power domain node for rk3399 Date: Fri, 01 Jul 2016 00:50:06 +0200 Message-ID: <2164835.qn3FrgoRRc@phil> References: <1467251760-14695-1-git-send-email-wxt@rock-chips.com> <2709691.LCsUme3dJo@phil> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: "Linux-rockchip" Errors-To: linux-rockchip-bounces+glpar-linux-rockchip=m.gmane.org-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org To: Doug Anderson Cc: "devicetree-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org" , Elaine Zhang , Brian Norris , "linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org" , "open list:ARM/Rockchip SoC..." , Xu Jianqun , "linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org" , Caesar Wang List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org Am Donnerstag, 30. Juni 2016, 15:32:01 schrieb Doug Anderson: > Hi, > > On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 2:57 PM, Heiko Stuebner wrote: > >> It looks like there are also more power domains that you haven't > >> listed here (like PD_GMAC, for instance, or PD_CORE_L). Are you > >> planning to add those in a followon patch? > > > > that reminds me, nodes with a reg property should have the base address > > in the node name as well. Using the constant works nicely, as can be > > seen on> > > the rk3288 where we have for example: > > pd_vio@RK3288_PD_VIO > > I was wondering about that. The device tree bindings are similarly > missing the reg from the example. > > I'm curious: for sorting purposes, are you supposed to know the > underlying integer and use that for sorting, or sort by the name of > the #define? requiring the underlying integer sounds very cumbersome, especially as the sorting is only a style-thing. So personally I'd take the constants name as sorting criteria, as everything else would be somewhat counter-intuitive. Heiko From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: heiko@sntech.de (Heiko Stuebner) Date: Fri, 01 Jul 2016 00:50:06 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] arm64: dts: rockchip: add the power domain node for rk3399 In-Reply-To: References: <1467251760-14695-1-git-send-email-wxt@rock-chips.com> <2709691.LCsUme3dJo@phil> Message-ID: <2164835.qn3FrgoRRc@phil> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Am Donnerstag, 30. Juni 2016, 15:32:01 schrieb Doug Anderson: > Hi, > > On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 2:57 PM, Heiko Stuebner wrote: > >> It looks like there are also more power domains that you haven't > >> listed here (like PD_GMAC, for instance, or PD_CORE_L). Are you > >> planning to add those in a followon patch? > > > > that reminds me, nodes with a reg property should have the base address > > in the node name as well. Using the constant works nicely, as can be > > seen on> > > the rk3288 where we have for example: > > pd_vio at RK3288_PD_VIO > > I was wondering about that. The device tree bindings are similarly > missing the reg from the example. > > I'm curious: for sorting purposes, are you supposed to know the > underlying integer and use that for sorting, or sort by the name of > the #define? requiring the underlying integer sounds very cumbersome, especially as the sorting is only a style-thing. So personally I'd take the constants name as sorting criteria, as everything else would be somewhat counter-intuitive. Heiko