Messages in this thread | | | From | Kevin Hilman <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] arm64: dts: meson-axg: add clock DT info for Meson AXG SoC | Date | Wed, 06 Dec 2017 11:11:59 -0800 |
| |
Stephen Boyd <sboyd@codeaurora.org> writes:
> On 12/01, Jerome Brunet wrote: >> On Fri, 2017-12-01 at 08:34 -0800, Stephen Boyd wrote: >> > On 11/30, Yixun Lan wrote: >> > > Hi Stephen >> > > >> > > On 11/30/17 03:35, Stephen Boyd wrote: >> > > > >> > > > Maybe just call the node "bus@ff63c000"? >> > > > >> > > >> > > isn't this just a name? what's the benefits to change? >> > > personally, I tend to keep it this way, because it's better map to the >> > > data sheet >> > > >> > > we also has 'aobus', 'cbus' scattered there.. >> > >> > Per the ePAPR node names are supposed to be generic, like disk, >> > cpu, display-controller, gpu, etc. I've never heard of a hiubus, >> > so probably it's some vendor specific thing? We have the phandle >> > anyway so it's not like we're losing much information here. >> >> Stephen, there is a lot of busses on platform. We can't just call them all >> 'bus'. >> I don't get the problem with this name. >> We are re-using the name from the datasheet here, no fancy invention. It seems >> to be quite common. >> > > Ok. I'm not the maintainer of the DTS so no worries from me. I'm > just pointing out that the ePAPR says that node names should be > generic, and 'hiubus' doesn't sound generic to me. If it matches > some datasheet then I suppose that's good, but probably that sort > of distinction should have gone into the compatible string > instead of the node name.
Stephen is right, the node-name should be generic (e.g. "bus") but the label can (should) be more SoC-specific, so it should look like:
hiubus: bus@ff63c000 {
Note that we weren't strict about this for all the rest of the amlogic SoCs (mostly because I didn't notice ) but we should start doing it correctly now. I'll also clean up the existing DTs.
Kevin
| |