Scott Wood <scottw...@freescale.com> writes: > On Fri, 2013-08-23 at 17:41 -0600, Anthony Foiani wrote: > > In my original patch [...] I used "fsl,sata-max-gen". I thought > > Jeff disliked it, so I changed it be more generic -- but maybe I > > misread his complaint. (And while his opinions are still > > respected, new maintainers might have different tastes.) > > I didn't see anything to that effect from Jeff in that thread -- maybe > it was elsewhere.
I think I'm referring to this message: http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.ports.ppc.embedded/58720 As he was referring me to generic methods, I inferred that I should be providing generic knobs... > The device tree describes the hardware, not the driver -- and thus > should be free to use clearer wording. :-) *nod* > As for fsl-specific versus generic, generic is fine but then it > needs to be documented in a generic place. Agreed. I actually prefer the "generation" nomenclature, as it has a more direct/straightforward interpretation. ("speed=1" vs "generation=1"; the latter is a much bigger clue, IMHO.) > Sorry, linux-ide. Ok, thanks. I'll wait a few days to see if there are any other comments or concerns, then I'll spin a final version As always, thanks for the review and insight! Best regards, Anthony Foiani _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev