On Thursday 20 March 2014 21:39:56 Jassi Brar wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 11:16 PM, Arnd Bergmann <a...@arndb.de> wrote:
> > On Monday 17 March 2014, Jassi Brar wrote:
>
> >> Perhaps the mailbox controller driver should name its links as it
> >> wants. By how the remote works with the mailbox links, the client
> >> driver asks for a specific mailbox link (which maybe a hardcoded
> >> string in the driver or be gotten alongside other data via client's
> >> DT) ?
> >
> > I don't see why we should do it any different from the other bindings.
> > Let's just stick with mboxes/mbox-names or mailboxes/mailbox-names
> > if you prefer.
> >
> >> IOW we can't have a generic API/DT-bindings that could get us
> >> reusable client drivers. But only common framework/code that would
> >> otherwise be duplicated by every platform.
> >
> > That is a major benefit though.
> > Also even if most drivers won't work across multiple platforms, there
> > is still a reasonable chance that /some/ drivers will.
> >
> It seems those /some/ drivers will have to work with everything same
> but the channel name (which the client could get from its DT node when
> the second platform appears).
Why would you ever have varying channel names? I would expect that
the name is always fixed in the binding of the client driver, like
we do for clocks or interrupts for instance.
Arnd
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
