Hey Sebastian, Mason, * Please fix mailer to wrap text at a sane length. I've re-wrapped and trimmed.
On Tue, Jul 05, 2016 at 02:30:12PM +0200, Sebastian Frias wrote: > On 07/04/2016 02:11 PM, Mason wrote: ... > >> .../sigma,smp87xx-irqrouter.txt | 69 +++ > > > > In the *actual* submission, we can't use a wildcard like smp87xx > > we'll have to use an actual part number. > > Are you sure? > That would hinder genericity. > Actually I wanted to call it "sigma,smp-irqrouter.txt" (or > "sigma,smp,irqrouter.txt"). sigma,smp-irqrouter.txt should be fine. The devicetree maintainers should yelp if they want something different. > To me there's no need to link the compatible string of a given HW > module with that of the chip name the module it is embedded into. For > example, the generic USB3 driver is "generic-xhci". While this module > is not generic to be embedded in chips from different manufacturers, > it is supposed to be generic within Sigma, and multiple Sigma chips > (with potentially different denominations) can use it. > > > > >> drivers/irqchip/Makefile | 1 + > >> drivers/irqchip/irq-tango_v2.c | 594 > >> +++++++++++++++++++++ > > > > Likewise, I don't like the "_v2" suffix, it's too generic. > > Actual submission should use something more specific. > > Well, the other driver is irq-tango.c that is generic as well. > I prefer versioning, as it is unrelated with the actual chip name. Is there a name, similar to 'tango', for this version of the IP? Something that would spark recognition for someone looking for "the damn driver for this XYZ irqchip I have". If not, irq-tango_v2.c is fine. thx, Jason.
