[PATCH 00/04] ARM: shmobile: Use SoC suffix for INTC compat string

[Simon Horman]

On Thu, Dec 05, 2013 at 11:50:04AM +0900, Simon Horman wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 04, 2013 at 08:21:42PM +0100, Magnus Damm wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 28, 2013 at 7:45 AM, Simon Horman <horms at verge.net.au> wrote:
> > > On Thu, Nov 28, 2013 at 08:14:50AM +0900, Magnus Damm wrote:
> > >> ARM: shmobile: Use SoC suffix for INTC compat string
> > >>
> > >> [PATCH 01/04] ARM: shmobile: Use sh73a0 suffix for INTC compat string
> > >> [PATCH 02/04] ARM: shmobile: Use r8a7740 suffix for INTC compat string
> > >> [PATCH 03/04] ARM: shmobile: Use r8a7778 suffix for INTC compat string
> > >> [PATCH 04/04] ARM: shmobile: Use r8a7779 suffix for INTC compat string
> > >>
> > >> Update the DTS for INTC irqpin devices to include the SoC in the compat string.
> > >>
> > >> Both IRQC and INTC irqpin need documentation for the DT bindings, and this
> > >> will happen in incremental patches.
> > >
> > > I have posted some patches for that a few moments ago :)
> > 
> > Thanks for that!
> > 
> > > I am curious to if it is intentional that this series replaces
> > > the use of less-specific compat strings with more specific ones
> > > while the recent update to the r8a7790 supplemented the
> > > less-specific renesas,irqc comat string with the more-specific
> > > renesas,irqc-r8a7790 compat string.
> > >
> > > i.e.
> > >         before: "renesas,intc-irqpin"
> > >         after:  "renesas,intc-irqpin-sh73a0"
> > >
> > >         as opposed to
> > >
> > >         before: "renesas,irqc"
> > >         after: "renesas,irqc-r8a7790", "renesas,irqc"
> > 
> > My intention is to keep them the same. I just checked the intc-irqpin
> > patches but they seem to be following the same style as IRQC. On which
> > SoC did you observe this difference?
> 
> Sorry, ignore this. I was confused.

Now that I am not longer confused I will queue up these patches.