Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2 RESEND 1/2] dt-bindings: serial: 8250: Add MediaTek BTIF controller bindings | From | Matthias Brugger <> | Date | Mon, 28 Aug 2017 08:21:20 +0300 |
| |
On 08/27/2017 10:39 PM, Sean Wang wrote: > On Sun, 2017-08-27 at 22:00 +0300, Matthias Brugger wrote: >> >> On 08/19/2017 09:06 PM, sean.wang@mediatek.com wrote: >>> From: Sean Wang <sean.wang@mediatek.com> >>> >>> Document the devicetree bindings in 8250.txt for MediaTek BTIF >>> controller which could be found on MT7622 and MT7623 SoC. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Sean Wang <sean.wang@mediatek.com> >>> --- >>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/8250.txt | 3 +++ >>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) >>> >>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/8250.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/8250.txt >>> index 419ff6c..7528d90 100644 >>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/8250.txt >>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/8250.txt >>> @@ -14,6 +14,9 @@ Required properties: >>> tegra132, or tegra210. >>> - "nxp,lpc3220-uart" >>> - "ralink,rt2880-uart" >>> + - For MediaTek MT7623, must contain "mediatek,mt7623-btif" >>> + - For other MediaTek SoCs , must contain "mediatek,<chip>-btif", >>> + "mediatek,mt7623-btif" where <chip> is mt7622. >> >> Hm, to me that's confusing. What about: >> "mediatek,mt7623-btif": for MediaTek MT7623 >> "mediatek,mt7622-btif", "mediatek,mt7623-btif": for MediaTek MT7622 >> >> If in the future we have more SoCs that support the BTIF, we should add them >> like the mt7622 case. >> > > I had v3, but it should have similar logic and also got ack from Rob > > I knew all your logic of adding binding document for all MediaTek > devices, even I alway added MediaTek device in dt-bindings as the way > you mentioned here, but I felt this way is fine for this kind of > dedicated document. > > The reason i don't add it as usual is the following. 8250.txt is common > and shared among all uart like devices, so i don't want btif device > occupies too much section and bloat the document when every new MediaTek > SoC is introduced. > > So instead I refer to existing Nvidia device added in 8250.txt which I > thought its way is simple, elegant and also using pattern I can use to > add btif devices. >
Working on my email backlog after vactions I didn't see that this was accepted by Rob. Sorry for the noise.
Matthias
| |