From: Sean Anderson <seanga2@gmail.com>
To: U Boot <u-boot@lists.denx.de>, Tom Rini <trini@konsulko.com>,
Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org>
Cc: "François Ozog" <francois.ozog@linaro.org>,
"Mark Kettenis" <mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl>,
"Oleksandr Andrushchenko" <Oleksandr_Andrushchenko@epam.com>,
"Weijie Gao" <weijie.gao@mediatek.com>,
"Ilias Apalodimas" <ilias.apalodimas@linaro.org>,
"Heinrich Schuchardt" <xypron.glpk@gmx.de>
Subject: Are dt-bindings headers part of the device tree spec?
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2021 10:53:26 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <c670a4cc-b234-03d4-adfb-e6a8560c2d86@gmail.com> (raw)
Hi all,
I'm reviewing a clock driver [1], and the submitter has deviated from
the defines used by Linux. For example, where Linux might have
#define CLOCK_FOOBAR 5
his driver might have
#define CLK_FUBAR 6
Which means that both the device tree source and the resulting device
tree binary will be different.
As I understand it, we try to be compatible with Linux on these things.
However, it is unclear to me if include/dt-bindings is also part of
this, or just the things in Documentation/devicetree/bindings. And if it
is, do we need to have compatible sources, compatible binaries, or both?
In general, I think we should try to have the same headers as well, but
is it permitted to allow deviations with reasonable justification?
--Sean
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/u-boot/de6e75a083647dfeec3058dd4dcc0419b08e155c.1637285375.git.weijie.gao@mediatek.com/
next reply other threads:[~2021-12-15 16:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-12-15 15:53 Sean Anderson [this message]
2021-12-15 16:11 ` Are dt-bindings headers part of the device tree spec? Tom Rini
2021-12-17 16:37 ` Simon Glass
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=c670a4cc-b234-03d4-adfb-e6a8560c2d86@gmail.com \
--to=seanga2@gmail.com \
--cc=Oleksandr_Andrushchenko@epam.com \
--cc=francois.ozog@linaro.org \
--cc=ilias.apalodimas@linaro.org \
--cc=mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl \
--cc=sjg@chromium.org \
--cc=trini@konsulko.com \
--cc=u-boot@lists.denx.de \
--cc=weijie.gao@mediatek.com \
--cc=xypron.glpk@gmx.de \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).