From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.1 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0C6A2C282DA for ; Wed, 17 Apr 2019 13:58:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C573F206BA for ; Wed, 17 Apr 2019 13:58:03 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linaro.org header.i=@linaro.org header.b="tHtvYLxi" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1732318AbfDQN6C (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Apr 2019 09:58:02 -0400 Received: from mail-it1-f194.google.com ([209.85.166.194]:56038 "EHLO mail-it1-f194.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1729940AbfDQN6B (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Apr 2019 09:58:01 -0400 Received: by mail-it1-f194.google.com with SMTP id y134so4673278itc.5 for ; Wed, 17 Apr 2019 06:58:01 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linaro.org; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=r5h32+drSoE54EyvHLyIsrM6JZG0yPGOI/3krhxwzbQ=; b=tHtvYLxiK8ft+wJ7IbmVKufEezCX/JUVctfVpTD7kQ89k2Zu55rObYNZmD7pGWTxtr RolIv6ujTiCuXyUvK5CnxCVBKQ6SWLjNVcgLN9vGfv8LKUh1lFa1B3r1tEWY6IyFrYld 4syb8Ia918gVL39IHxVHELhSDJSHOTvpV4AOd/8Gp0hEV2eMGkYf27r0XrT50z20fDtA lvXHT9RJrimjArD1uEoJKnwnh22tB2dKEeoadvKtU/KpZ5sHUIFsvtjahLIE26ly6q3W HYaj7xamOtKZs3e4Ywhrua9ROaLP0X50uTyldUfwkTJCKVt3c6d3Itsj7aPgMl+RZ+Uk JyXQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=r5h32+drSoE54EyvHLyIsrM6JZG0yPGOI/3krhxwzbQ=; b=JTQjbV8FrU9erUAZP4jbz3S4PXa+GL9+uPxrSY9QoBG1SDb554+y94no6Zd2bJNQXu HTTmrHnDJzV4QIlVYjDIub0YFGoaj9VsR+FGPrXLuXmX+/ak3vxgK7Ked7HD3VUuAcuC 6s997/bI9iFziSDFFw/CYnA1jNMON21vgtHEGIFob8yL0C6qHTFh3YrzhPoCeEKIEC3P +fxs+vVBNsQWifje6E/X3FqUEDwLnI7AMOZr/M78ak5bnL9BY8/lYzyc7UzPiduymp8t EDuFWwrcO4mxrP4mLFFAe/00M2mp8xJEODHbG0n89L3N4+7gwVBu/DwUkUSStFJ3J074 QBBg== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUu9AETOovXmNvN+9RPPq60D1uB3bS1EfczRZZX6dGNElplJ+b8 DgimBNq3m16vPWWe6XJoySIGIJ3pT4qALhTtK/vAwA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqztMwK1QRhYP119Nie/vqUAxuwnAGSKS4TeeOGW+tVyW7XIfBVB13GwGATJwSHN/Ol+7MbzWO+SBCD3wVP7f5s= X-Received: by 2002:a24:ee83:: with SMTP id b125mr32363980iti.43.1555509480777; Wed, 17 Apr 2019 06:58:00 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20190412102738.12679-1-leo.yan@linaro.org> <20190412102738.12679-2-leo.yan@linaro.org> <20190417000959.GB6202@leoy-ThinkPad-X240s> In-Reply-To: <20190417000959.GB6202@leoy-ThinkPad-X240s> From: Mathieu Poirier Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2019 07:57:50 -0600 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/4] dt-bindings: arm: coresight: Add new compatible for static replicator To: Leo Yan Cc: Suzuki K Poulose , Rob Herring , Mark Rutland , Alexander Shishkin , linux-arm-kernel , devicetree@vger.kernel.org, Linux Kernel Mailing List Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 16 Apr 2019 at 18:10, Leo Yan wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 02:18:40PM -0600, Mathieu Poirier wrote: > > Hi Leo, > > > > On Fri, 12 Apr 2019 at 04:28, Leo Yan wrote: > > > > > > CoreSight uses below bindings for replicator: > > > > > > Dynamic replicator, aka. configurable replicator: > > > "arm,coresight-dynamic-replicator", "arm,primecell"; > > > > > > Static replicator, aka. non-configurable replicator: > > > "arm,coresight-replicator"; > > > > > > The compatible string "arm,coresight-replicator" is not an explicit > > > naming to express the replicator is 'static'. To unify the naming > > > convention, this patch introduces a new compatible string > > > "arm,coresight-static-replicator" for the static replicator; the > > > compatible string "arm,coresight-replicator" is kept for backward > > > compatibility, but tag it as obsolete and suggest to use the new > > > compatible string. > > > > > > As result CoreSight replicator have below bindings: > > > > > > Dynamic replicator: > > > "arm,coresight-dynamic-replicator", "arm,primecell"; > > > > > > Static replicator: > > > "arm,coresight-static-replicator"; > > > "arm,coresight-replicator"; (obsolete) > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Leo Yan > > > --- > > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/coresight.txt | 7 +++++-- > > > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/coresight.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/coresight.txt > > > index f8aff65ab921..d02d160fa8ac 100644 > > > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/coresight.txt > > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/coresight.txt > > > @@ -69,7 +69,10 @@ its hardware characteristcs. > > > > > > * compatible: Currently supported value is (note the absence of the > > > AMBA markee): > > > - - "arm,coresight-replicator" > > > + - Coresight Non-configurable Replicator: > > > + "arm,coresight-static-replicator"; > > > + "arm,coresight-replicator"; (OBSOLETE. For backward > > > + compatibility and will be removed) > > > > > > * port or ports: see "Graph bindings for Coresight" below. > > > > > > @@ -169,7 +172,7 @@ Example: > > > /* non-configurable replicators don't show up on the > > > * AMBA bus. As such no need to add "arm,primecell". > > > */ > > > - compatible = "arm,coresight-replicator"; > > > + compatible = "arm,coresight-static-replicator"; > > > > > > out-ports { > > > #address-cells = <1>; > > > -- > > > 2.17.1 > > > > Since this is a binding patch it needs to be sent on its own. > > Thanks for reminding, Mathieu. > > Since this is the second time you remind me to send DT binding related > patches separately, so I may misunderstand your meaning and want to get > clarification to avoid making the same mistake for many times. > > Before I remembered in one patch set we need to organise patches with > sending document patch (or document changing patch) ahead and then > followed by the corresponding code change patch. So this can give the > reviewers more clear context; and this also can present the merging > dependency between document change patches and the code change patches. > > This is the rule I followed in this patch set and I sent to CoreSight > and DT maintainers (and mailing lists) together. > > Please let me know what you think about this? And also welcome > Rob/Mark's suggestions. https://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/submitting-patches.txt > > Thanks, > Leo Yan