From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stephen Warren Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] hwspinlock/msm: Add support for Qualcomm MSM HW Mutex block Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2013 16:54:52 -0600 Message-ID: <520EADBC.9090608@wwwdotorg.org> References: <1376507361-26907-1-git-send-email-galak@codeaurora.org> <1376573746.18617.45.camel@hornet> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1376573746.18617.45.camel@hornet> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Pawel Moll Cc: Kumar Gala , "ohad@wizery.com" , "rob.herring@calxeda.com" , Mark Rutland , Ian Campbell , "grant.likely@linaro.org" , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org" , Jeffrey Hugo , Eric Holmberg List-Id: linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org On 08/15/2013 07:35 AM, Pawel Moll wrote: > On Wed, 2013-08-14 at 20:09 +0100, Kumar Gala wrote: >> +Required properties: >> +- compatible: should be "qcom,tcsr-mutex" >> +- reg: Should contain registers location and length of mutex registers >> +- reg-names: >> + "mutex-base" - string to identify mutex registers > > Just out of curiosity, why is reg-names required? Especially if there > seem to be only one set of registers? Indeed, I tend to think that reg-names is a bad idea. IIRC, the rule for "reg" is that entries must always have a defined order, so that it can always be accessed by integer index. And given that's true, allowing for reg-names just creates confusion since it implies you can look up the index in reg-names and then read reg at that index. Now the same isn't true for clocks/clock-names for example, where it's defined that there is no order, so you must search clock-names first. Inconsistency in rules, uggh.