On 03/19/2015 09:33 AM, Paul Walmsley wrote:
On Tue, 17 Mar 2015, Stephen Warren wrote:

On 03/17/2015 02:32 AM, Paul Walmsley wrote:
For Tegra132 and later chips, we can now use the correct hardware base
address for the Tegra AHB IP block in the DT data.  Update the DT binding
documentation to reflect this change.

diff --git
a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/tegra/nvidia,tegra20-ahb.txt
b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/tegra/nvidia,tegra20-ahb.txt
index 067c979..7692b4c 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/tegra/nvidia,tegra20-ahb.txt
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/tegra/nvidia,tegra20-ahb.txt
@@ -2,10 +2,15 @@ NVIDIA Tegra AHB

   Required properties:
   - compatible : For Tegra20, must contain "nvidia,tegra20-ahb".  For
-  Tegra30, must contain "nvidia,tegra30-ahb".  Otherwise, must contain
-  '"nvidia,<chip>-ahb", "nvidia,tegra30-ahb"' where <chip> is tegra124,
-  tegra132, or tegra210.
-- reg : Should contain 1 register ranges(address and length)
+  Tegra30, must contain "nvidia,tegra30-ahb".  For Tegra114 and Tegra124,
must
+  contain '"nvidia,<chip>-ahb", "nvidia,tegra30-ahb"' where <chip> is
tegra114
+  or tegra124.  For Tegra132, the compatible string must contain
+  "nvidia,tegra132-ahb".
+
+- reg : Should contain 1 register ranges(address and length).  On Tegra20,
+  Tegra30, Tegra114, and Tegra124 chips, the low byte of the physical base
+  address of the IP block must end in 0x04.  On DT files for later chips,
the
+  actual hardware base address of the IP block should be used.

A table-based approach rather than prose might make this more legible?

- compatible: Must contain the following:
   Tegra20:  "nvidia,tegra20-ahb"
   Tegra30:  "nvidia,tegra30-ahb"
   Tegra114: "nvidia,tegra114-ahb", "nvidia,tegra30-ahb"
   Tegra124: "nvidia,tegra124-ahb", "nvidia,tegra30-ahb"
   Tegra132: "nvidia,tegra132-ahb"
   Tegra210: "nvidia,tegra210-ahb", "nvidia,tegra132-ahb"

With any luck, we can extend that final item for future chips to be:

   Tegra210, TegraNNN:
             "nvidia,tegra<chip>-ahb", "nvidia,tegra132-ahb"

Perhaps we format the 114/124 entry that way too.

I think I'm just going to drop this patch, since Russell prefers that the
workaround is applied in the driver.

With regards to using tables rather than narrative descriptions: perhaps
consider a patch to
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/submitting-patches.txt ?  I don't know
what the DT binding documentation maintainers' future plans are with
regards to automated documentation reflow, etc., but submitting a patch
there would stimulate at least some coordination on the issue.

I don't think it's appropriate for that file to dictate that, in the same way that coding style documentation generally doesn't address that kind of detail regarding code structure. Rather, the code review process hopefully homes in on the best representation case-by-case. A table seems more succinct and unambiguous in this case. Most DT bindings don't need to specify this level of detail since there aren't so many inconsistent options; the generic rules apply.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Reply via email to