On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 02:08:09PM +0000, Stuart Yoder wrote: > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Mark Rutland [mailto:mark.rutl...@arm.com] > > > > On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 06:16:13PM -0600, Stuart Yoder wrote:
> > > In the iommu-map binding change references to iommu-specifier to > > > "IOMMU specifier" so we are 100% consistent everywhere with terminology > > > and capitalization. > > > > Elsewhere, we always use lower case "xxx-specifier" or "xxx specifier", > > e.g. Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/gpio.txt defines > > "gpio-specifier", ePAPR defines "interrupt specifier". > > > > Given we're morstly consistent on "iommu-specifier" today,could we > > please jsut update the ARM SMMU binding to match that? If we're going to > > fix the dash mismatch, that's a more general, cross-binding thing. > > The notable place where we don't use "iommu-specifier" in in the generic > IOMMU binding itself where we use "IOMMU specifier". True; I failed to notice that. You are right in that the pci-iommu binding is the odd one out. Sorry for the misinformation above. :/ > You're suggesting using "iommu-specifier" everywhere including the > generic binding? Sounds fine to me. It's a nit but would like to see > it consistent everywhere. I certainly agree that we should be consistent. So FWIW, for this patch (as-is): Acked-by: Mark Rutland <mark.rutl...@arm.com> Thanks, Mark. _______________________________________________ iommu mailing list iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/iommu
