On Wed, 2017-08-16 at 14:12 +0200, Andreas Färber wrote:
> Hi Andre,
>
> Am 16.08.2017 um 13:30 schrieb Andre Przywara:
> > On 16/08/17 10:46, Philipp Zabel wrote:
> > > +/**
> > > + * struct reset_simple_devdata - simple reset controller properties
> > > + * @active_low: if true, bits are cleared to assert the reset.
> > > Otherwise, bits
> > > + * are set to assert the reset.
> > > + */
> > > +struct reset_simple_devdata {
> > > > > > + bool active_low;
> > > +};
> > > +
> > > +static const struct reset_simple_devdata reset_simple_active_low = {
> > > > > > + .active_low = true,
> > > +};
> > > +
> > > +static const struct of_device_id reset_simple_dt_ids[] = {
> > > > > > + { .compatible = "allwinner,sun6i-a31-clock-reset",
> > > + .data = &reset_simple_active_low },
> >
> > Can we have a additional generic compatible string here? New users of
> > this driver then wouldn't need to explicitly enter their name into the
> > driver, but could just use the generic name as a fallback. This would
> > enable the driver without any Linux code change just by adding a DT node.
> >
> > compatible = "nexell,s5p6818-reset", "simple-reset";
> >
> > Whenever we need a quirk (now or in the future), we can add the specific
> > name into this structure along with the required workarounds.
>
> Same question about binding here. However the way it is done today, we
> would also need some optional active-low property then or two different
> compatible strings, as this is currently controlled via the DT matches.
I'd like to decouple this from the issue at hand, which is de-
duplicating simple reset code without device tree changes.
I'll make a separate suggestion for a simple binding on top of this
series.
regards
Philipp
