Re: [PATCH v2 1/5] dt-bindings: rtc: add bindings for i.MX53 SRTC

From: Fabio Estevam <festevam-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
To: "Patrick Brünn" <P.Bruenn-QonKdJ6Bx35Wk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org>
Cc: Rob Herring <robh-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>,
	linux-kernel-dev
	<linux-kernel-dev-QonKdJ6Bx35Wk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org>,
	Shawn Guo <shawnguo-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>,
	Sascha Hauer <kernel-bIcnvbaLZ9MEGnE8C9+IrQ@public.gmane.org>,
	Alessandro Zummo
	<a.zummo-BfzFCNDTiLLj+vYz1yj4TQ@public.gmane.org>,
	Alexandre Belloni
	<alexandre.belloni-wi1+55ScJUtKEb57/3fJTNBPR1lH4CV8@public.gmane.org>,
	Patrick Bruenn
	<p.bruenn-QonKdJ6Bx34e+czBwuGJN7NAH6kLmebB@public.gmane.org>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.org>,
	"open list:REAL TIME CLOCK (RTC) SUBSYSTEM"
	<linux-rtc-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org>,
	"open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS"
	<devicetree-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org>,
	open list <linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org>,
	Fabio Estevam <fabio.estevam-3arQi8VN3Tc@public.gmane.org>,
	Juergen Borleis <jbe-bIcnvbaLZ9MEGnE8C9+IrQ@public.gmane.org>,
	Noel Vellemans
	<Noel.Vellemans-8UENEgx6w+makBO8gow8eQ@public.gmane.org>,
	Russell King <linux-I+IVW8TIWO2tmTQ+vhA3Yw@public.gmane.org>,
	moderated list:ARM/FREESCALE IMX / MXC ARM ARCHITECTURE
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/5] dt-bindings: rtc: add bindings for i.MX53 SRTC
Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2017 21:08:00 -0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAOMZO5DoiLW3DxLF=agHua9jO-+LgWA3xw6h7kyj_uot47pkjw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3BB206AB2B1BD448954845CE6FF69A8E01CB53233C-vUij6NSodOcSOXk/eDA+lhuDmiLEvxRJ@public.gmane.org>

Hi Patrick,

On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 5:08 AM, Patrick Brünn <P.Bruenn-QonKdJ6Bx35Wk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org> wrote:

>>rtc@...
>>
> The rtc for which this series adds support is embedded within a function block called
> "Secure Real Time Clock". This driver doesn't utilize all of the hardware features by
> now. But maybe someone else wants to extend the functionalities, later.
> For that possibility I wanted to name the node "srtc". Should I still change this?
>
> I believe you have a much better understanding of what should be done here. I don't
> want to argue with you, just thought you might not had that information. So if I am
> wrong just tell me and I will change it without further "complaining".

>From the Devicetree Specification document:

"Generic Names Recommendation

The name of a node should be somewhat generic, reflecting the function
of the device and not its precise program-
ming model. If appropriate, the name should be one of the following choices:
...
rtc
"

So better use 'rtc' as suggested by Rob.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html