All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>
To: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com>
Cc: devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Frank Rowand <frowand.list@gmail.com>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [Question] directory for SoC-related DT binding
Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2018 06:19:30 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CABGGisx-iLr+CQ=JjmHEe5J_Qqpf0yrgOmSOHa74GnfwE_RKsA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAK7LNATaD=G8BW316fkBWM2A+YXgP5tabaySR2Fs49Za_0p=3Q@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 6:08 AM Masahiro Yamada
<yamada.masahiro@socionext.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
>
> I see a bunch of vendor (or SoC) names in
> Documentation/device/bindings/arm/
>
> ./Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/altera
> ./Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/amlogic

Yeah, it's kind of a mixture of board/soc bindings mostly with some
ARM architecture, ARM, Ltd. IP, and SoC system reg bindings.

Eventually, I'd like to not split board bindings by arch and maybe we
should move all the system/misc reg bindings out.

[,,,]

> I also see some vendor names in
> Documentation/device/bindings/soc/
>
> ./Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/bcm
> ./Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/dove
> ./Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/fsl
> ./Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/mediatek
> ./Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/qcom
> ./Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/rockchip
> ./Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/ti
> ./Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/xilinx
> ./Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/zte

This I believe is mostly SoC system reg bindings though there's
probably a few other things.

> Confusingly, I see bcm, mediatek, rockchip
> in both locations.
>
> Is there any rule to choose one than the other?

Top-level SoC/board bindings in arm/ and anything else elsewhere ideally.

Rob

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: robh@kernel.org (Rob Herring)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [Question] directory for SoC-related DT binding
Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2018 06:19:30 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CABGGisx-iLr+CQ=JjmHEe5J_Qqpf0yrgOmSOHa74GnfwE_RKsA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAK7LNATaD=G8BW316fkBWM2A+YXgP5tabaySR2Fs49Za_0p=3Q@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 6:08 AM Masahiro Yamada
<yamada.masahiro@socionext.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
>
> I see a bunch of vendor (or SoC) names in
> Documentation/device/bindings/arm/
>
> ./Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/altera
> ./Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/amlogic

Yeah, it's kind of a mixture of board/soc bindings mostly with some
ARM architecture, ARM, Ltd. IP, and SoC system reg bindings.

Eventually, I'd like to not split board bindings by arch and maybe we
should move all the system/misc reg bindings out.

[,,,]

> I also see some vendor names in
> Documentation/device/bindings/soc/
>
> ./Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/bcm
> ./Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/dove
> ./Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/fsl
> ./Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/mediatek
> ./Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/qcom
> ./Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/rockchip
> ./Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/ti
> ./Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/xilinx
> ./Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/zte

This I believe is mostly SoC system reg bindings though there's
probably a few other things.

> Confusingly, I see bcm, mediatek, rockchip
> in both locations.
>
> Is there any rule to choose one than the other?

Top-level SoC/board bindings in arm/ and anything else elsewhere ideally.

Rob

  reply	other threads:[~2018-10-10 11:19 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-10-10 11:07 [Question] directory for SoC-related DT binding Masahiro Yamada
2018-10-10 11:07 ` Masahiro Yamada
2018-10-10 11:19 ` Rob Herring [this message]
2018-10-10 11:19   ` Rob Herring
2018-10-10 12:04   ` Stefan Wahren
2018-10-10 12:04     ` Stefan Wahren
2018-10-10 12:09     ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2018-10-10 12:09       ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2018-10-10 12:16       ` Stefan Wahren
2018-10-10 12:16         ` Stefan Wahren
2018-10-10 12:16         ` Stefan Wahren
2018-10-10 18:59     ` Rob Herring
2018-10-10 18:59       ` Rob Herring
2018-10-10 18:59       ` Rob Herring
2018-10-10 12:07 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2018-10-10 12:07   ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2018-10-10 15:01   ` Masahiro Yamada
2018-10-10 15:01     ` Masahiro Yamada

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to='CABGGisx-iLr+CQ=JjmHEe5J_Qqpf0yrgOmSOHa74GnfwE_RKsA@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=robh@kernel.org \
    --cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=frowand.list@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
    --cc=yamada.masahiro@socionext.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.