[Really adding Mark]
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 9:25 PM, Olof Johansson <o...@lixom.net> wrote: > [adding Mark] > > On Sat, May 17, 2014 at 06:22:16AM +0200, Alexandre Belloni wrote: >> On 16/05/2014 at 16:26:35 -0700, Olof Johansson wrote : >> > On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 07:39:35PM +0200, Nicolas Ferre wrote: >> > > There is a little conflict with at91-3.16-dt that you already pulled in >> > > arm-soc: here is the branch that resolves it: >> > > >> > > https://github.com/at91linux/linux-at91/commits/at91-3.16-resolved >> > >> > That resolution looks odd. Why is one clock under clocks { } and two of >> > them >> > are at the top level? Shouldn't they all be under the clocks subnode? >> > >> > I've merged in now with your resolution, but I think this needs revisiting. >> > >> >> Actually, all the clocks should end up at the root, please refer to: >> http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2014-March/240219.html >> >> I feel that was one of the topics we should have discussed at ELC but we >> ended up talking about DT ABI stability instead... > > I'm looking more for consistency than anything else. Having a few in the > root and the few in a subnode certainly indicates that something's wrong. > > It's a good thing that we have several DT maintainers to spread the load, > but it's also harder to learn the preferences of the maintainer(s) since > there seems to be variety (some care more about some things than others). > > I'm not saying that Mark is wrong, but it's quite possible that someone > else would disagree or not care enough to point it out. The current > practice of having clocks under a subnode is prevalent almost everywhere > in the tree, and this is a mostly new direction set by Mark. It makes > it very hard to figure out what's the best way to do things when there's > less consistency. > > Clearly, having clocks grouped in a subnode is common practice already, and > makes some sense from a readability point of view. > > Anyway, I'll leave the rest for some DT maintainer to sort out. Please > follow up with patches to switch over to one or the other model no matter > what, please. > > > -Olof -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
