[PATCH v2 1/5] ARM: shmobile: r8a7740: Add CMT1 device to DT

[Laurent Pinchart]

Hello,

On Wednesday 20 August 2014 08:11:50 Simon Horman wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 07:17:33PM +0900, Magnus Damm wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 4:29 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > > On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 8:39 AM, Magnus Damm:
> > >>>  arch/arm/boot/dts/r8a7740.dtsi | 12 ++++++++++++
> > >>>  1 file changed, 12 insertions(+)
> > >>> 
> > >>> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/r8a7740.dtsi
> > >>> b/arch/arm/boot/dts/r8a7740.dtsi index 6cd6a46..1067a96 100644
> > >>> --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/r8a7740.dtsi
> > >>> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/r8a7740.dtsi
> > >>> @@ -41,6 +41,18 @@
> > >>> 
> > >>>                 interrupts = <0 83 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;
> > >>>         
> > >>>         };
> > >>> 
> > >>> +       cmt1: timer at e6138000 {
> > >>> +               compatible = "renesas,cmt-48";
> > >> 
> > >> Do we want to have the "r8a7740" in the compatible string somewhere?
> > > 
> > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/timer/renesas,cmt.txt does not
> > > mention compatible properties containing SoC names.
> > 
> > Right, that seems to be missing from the timers. Is there any reason
> > why we need to treat those in a special way?
> > 
> > In my mind this timer case is similar to various SCIF variants
> > documented in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/renesas,sci-
> > serial.txt - in the case of SCIF we have SoC name in the binding
> > documentation.
>
> FWIW, now you mention it I agree with your point.
> But I am interested to hear if Laurent had a specific reason for this.
> 
> If it is an oversight then I recommend correcting it as a series
> of add-on patches, even for the r8a7740. That will avoid adding
> more dependencies to this series.

I believe you all know my position regarding SoC names in compatible strings 
:-) I still don't agree, but I pretty much gave up on convincing the world so 
I won't fight and nack patches.

-- 
Regards,

Laurent Pinchart