From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756160AbeEAQTc (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 May 2018 12:19:32 -0400 Received: from mail-ot0-f195.google.com ([74.125.82.195]:39711 "EHLO mail-ot0-f195.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755316AbeEAQTa (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 May 2018 12:19:30 -0400 X-Google-Smtp-Source: AB8JxZqQ+O0YTUvVjsxmwPLHXNBp4Xe/k0VsanZ5k/52Mp5NpYv/uy+44loo0IVHYUO2B/y401mBMg== Date: Tue, 1 May 2018 11:11:25 -0500 From: Rob Herring To: Andreas =?iso-8859-1?Q?F=E4rber?= Cc: Thierry Reding , Wesley Terpstra , Mark Rutland , Noralf =?iso-8859-1?Q?Tr=F8nnes?= , David Lechner , Alexandre Belloni , SZ Lin , linux-pwm@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] dt-bindings: added new pwm-sifive driver documentation Message-ID: <20180501161125.GA14380@rob-hp-laptop> References: <1524869998-2805-1-git-send-email-wesley@sifive.com> <1524869998-2805-2-git-send-email-wesley@sifive.com> <20180429055417.GA10221@mithrandir> <60772240-3c75-7814-9237-d60916a8ceca@suse.de> <20180430081946.GH2484@ulmo> <61f24d16-5095-76e4-845e-2434029fe1f0@suse.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <61f24d16-5095-76e4-845e-2434029fe1f0@suse.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 12:45:20PM +0200, Andreas Färber wrote: > Am 30.04.2018 um 10:19 schrieb Thierry Reding: > > On Sun, Apr 29, 2018 at 02:08:07PM -0700, Wesley Terpstra wrote: > >> On Sun, Apr 29, 2018 at 2:01 PM, Andreas Färber wrote: > >>> "pwm0" sounds like a zero-indexed instance of some pwm block. If 0 is > >>> the version here, I'd suggest to make it "pwm-0" for example - you might > >>> want to take a look at the Xilinx bindings, which use a strict x.yy suffix. > >> > >> That's fine. I'll change it to pwm-0.00 in the next patch series. > > > > This should match the version that you use. If you're internal > > versioning uses single digits, or a single version number, then I think > > there's no need to use 0.00, because that would just be confusing. > > However I think it'd be good to make sure it is discernible as a version > > number. Perhaps something like sifive,pwm-v0. That seems to be a fairly > > common scheme. > > Yes. My point was not to adopt another vendor's versioning scheme but to > adopt _some_ consistent scheme and document it, e.g., in a sifive.txt > similar to xilinx.txt: > > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git/tree/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/xilinx.txt > > It should be made clear what in the compatible string the version is > (thus my proposal of using a dash as separator), and there you may want > to document how to map between IP/documentation and compatibles for any > new bindings. Yes. And using versions in compatible strings is only accepted when there is a well defined versioning process. FPGAs tend to be the main case as most SoC vendors don't have rigorous versioning processes. I guess it makes sense for SiFive from the little I know about them. What doesn't make sense or get accepted is software folks just making up v1, v2, v3, etc. Rob