From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754351AbaIXRGr (ORCPT ); Wed, 24 Sep 2014 13:06:47 -0400 Received: from mail-bn1bon0099.outbound.protection.outlook.com ([157.56.111.99]:11104 "EHLO na01-bn1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752213AbaIXRGq (ORCPT ); Wed, 24 Sep 2014 13:06:46 -0400 Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2014 19:06:30 +0200 From: Michal Simek User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: =?UTF-8?B?U8O2cmVuIEJyaW5rbWFubg==?= , Michal Simek CC: , , Josh Cartwright , Steffen Trumtrar , Rob Herring , Peter Crosthwaite , Rob Herring , Pawel Moll , Mark Rutland , Ian Campbell , Kumar Gala , Russell King , , Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] ARM: zynq: DT: Add missing reference for ADC References: <20140924161814.GG13679@xsjandreislx> In-Reply-To: <20140924161814.GG13679@xsjandreislx> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-RCIS-Action: ALLOW X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: IMSS-7.1.0.1224-7.5.0.1018-20950.003 X-TM-AS-User-Approved-Sender: Yes Message-ID: X-EOPAttributedMessage: 0 X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: CIP:62.221.5.235;CTRY:GB;IPV:NLI;EFV:NLI;SFV:NSPM;SFS:(10009020)(6009001)(438002)(199003)(479174003)(377454003)(164054003)(24454002)(51704005)(189002)(377424004)(1496007)(23676002)(86362001)(44976005)(83322001)(19580405001)(31966008)(64126003)(64706001)(95666004)(19580395003)(85852003)(83072002)(92566001)(31696002)(92726001)(20776003)(83506001)(47776003)(87936001)(65806001)(65956001)(50986999)(76176999)(70736001)(46102003)(74662003)(102836001)(54356999)(81542003)(76482002)(81342003)(50466002)(90102001)(77982003)(80022003)(104016003)(21056001)(106466001)(79102003)(85306004)(6806004)(4396001)(10300001)(107046002)(74502003)(120916001)(99396003)(74316001)(65826006)(107986001);DIR:OUT;SFP:1101;SCL:1;SRVR:BY2FFO11HUB011;H:xir-pvapsmtpgw01;FPR:;MLV:sfv;PTR:unknown-62-221-5-235.ipspace.xilinx.com;A:1;MX:1;LANG:en; X-Microsoft-Antispam: BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;UriScan:; X-Forefront-PRVS: 03449D5DD1 Authentication-Results: spf=pass (sender IP is 62.221.5.235) smtp.mailfrom=michal.simek@xilinx.com; X-OriginatorOrg: xilinx.com Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 09/24/2014 06:18 PM, Sören Brinkmann wrote: > On Wed, 2014-09-24 at 04:01PM +0200, Michal Simek wrote: >> Add missing reference for ADC node. >> >> Signed-off-by: Michal Simek >> --- >> >> arch/arm/boot/dts/zynq-7000.dtsi | 2 +- >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/zynq-7000.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/zynq-7000.dtsi >> index 772381fe07bb..fc90f47f9c03 100644 >> --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/zynq-7000.dtsi >> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/zynq-7000.dtsi >> @@ -64,7 +64,7 @@ >> interrupt-parent = <&intc>; >> ranges; >> >> - adc@f8007100 { >> + adc: adc@f8007100 { > I think we enumerated all labels. I.e. 'adc0' is probably better. I was thinking about it and the reason I didn't use that adc0 was that it is unique and it is just one in PS. Maybe there could be another adc in PL but it will be probably automated not to use adc key world. For PL part names was depending on user description. Anyway logic was not to use enumerated label for unique IPs. Thanks, Michal From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Michal Simek Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] ARM: zynq: DT: Add missing reference for ADC Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2014 19:06:30 +0200 Message-ID: References: <20140924161814.GG13679@xsjandreislx> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20140924161814.GG13679@xsjandreislx> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: =?UTF-8?B?U8O2cmVuIEJyaW5rbWFubg==?= , Michal Simek Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, monstr@monstr.eu, Josh Cartwright , Steffen Trumtrar , Rob Herring , Peter Crosthwaite , Rob Herring , Pawel Moll , Mark Rutland , Ian Campbell , Kumar Gala , Russell King , devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On 09/24/2014 06:18 PM, S=C3=B6ren Brinkmann wrote: > On Wed, 2014-09-24 at 04:01PM +0200, Michal Simek wrote: >> Add missing reference for ADC node. >> >> Signed-off-by: Michal Simek >> --- >> >> arch/arm/boot/dts/zynq-7000.dtsi | 2 +- >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/zynq-7000.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/zy= nq-7000.dtsi >> index 772381fe07bb..fc90f47f9c03 100644 >> --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/zynq-7000.dtsi >> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/zynq-7000.dtsi >> @@ -64,7 +64,7 @@ >> interrupt-parent =3D <&intc>; >> ranges; >> >> - adc@f8007100 { >> + adc: adc@f8007100 { > I think we enumerated all labels. I.e. 'adc0' is probably better. I was thinking about it and the reason I didn't use that adc0 was that it is unique and it is just one in PS. Maybe there could be anothe= r adc in PL but it will be probably automated not to use adc key world. =46or PL part names was depending on user description. Anyway logic was not to use enumerated label for unique IPs. Thanks, Michal From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: michal.simek@xilinx.com (Michal Simek) Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2014 19:06:30 +0200 Subject: [PATCH 1/2] ARM: zynq: DT: Add missing reference for ADC In-Reply-To: <20140924161814.GG13679@xsjandreislx> References: <20140924161814.GG13679@xsjandreislx> Message-ID: To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 09/24/2014 06:18 PM, S?ren Brinkmann wrote: > On Wed, 2014-09-24 at 04:01PM +0200, Michal Simek wrote: >> Add missing reference for ADC node. >> >> Signed-off-by: Michal Simek >> --- >> >> arch/arm/boot/dts/zynq-7000.dtsi | 2 +- >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/zynq-7000.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/zynq-7000.dtsi >> index 772381fe07bb..fc90f47f9c03 100644 >> --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/zynq-7000.dtsi >> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/zynq-7000.dtsi >> @@ -64,7 +64,7 @@ >> interrupt-parent = <&intc>; >> ranges; >> >> - adc at f8007100 { >> + adc: adc at f8007100 { > I think we enumerated all labels. I.e. 'adc0' is probably better. I was thinking about it and the reason I didn't use that adc0 was that it is unique and it is just one in PS. Maybe there could be another adc in PL but it will be probably automated not to use adc key world. For PL part names was depending on user description. Anyway logic was not to use enumerated label for unique IPs. Thanks, Michal