From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 410C95AA for ; Wed, 18 Oct 2017 23:36:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from fry.fubar.geek.nz (fry.fubar.geek.nz [139.59.165.16]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 727F6196 for ; Wed, 18 Oct 2017 23:36:11 +0000 (UTC) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.3 \(3273\)) From: Andrew Turner In-Reply-To: <20171018175910.GP12015@bill-the-cat> Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2017 00:28:56 +0100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <20171017114823.58476908@bbrezillon> <20171018110958.mh76pngzluazmc7y@sirena.co.uk> <20171018175910.GP12015@bill-the-cat> To: Tom Rini Cc: Rob Herring , Kumar Gala , "ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org" , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" , devicetree-spec@vger.kernel.org, Pantelis Antoniou , Andy Gross , Lucas Stach , David Gibson Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] Devicetree Workshop at Kernel Summit Prague (26 Oct 2017) List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , > On 18 Oct 2017, at 18:59, Tom Rini wrote: >=20 > On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 12:09:58PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote: >> On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 06:35:24PM +0800, Chen-Yu Tsai wrote: >>=20 >>> I'd like to add something on the topic of non-Linux projects. In = this >>> case it's diverging DT bindings from U-boot: >>=20 >>> https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/823158/ >>=20 >>> U-boot already has a set of devicetree binding additions: >>> = https://github.com/u-boot/u-boot/tree/master/doc/device-tree-bindings >>=20 >>> The patch in question wants to ab(use) the regulator-name property = for >>> driver instance binding. In my opinion this is not going to fly, as >>> boards are free to define the names. This either sees no use other = than >>> as a dirty workaround for dts files that aren't following the PMIC >>> regulator bindings (regulator node names should follow well defined, >>> identifying names), or results in divergence of the DT files. >>=20 >> One meta issue I'm seeing here is that the u-boot people appear to = have >> their own divergent copy of some of the binding documents. >=20 > Putting on my U-Boot hat now, it's mostly unintentional and something = in > general (yes, the initial topic here is not such an example) we try = and > avoid, or use u-boot, as the prefix on as it's something that had been > previously rejected or deemed inappropriate to be in the upstream > version of the binding. >=20 > But perhaps it's time to try and force the issue again, given what Rob > and others have said in other parts of the thread. =46rom the FreeBSD perspective I=E2=80=99d like it if there was a common = repo for all devicetree consumers to share. We are trying to not have = FreeBSD specific properties as this has caused issues in the past where = we had (and still have) FreeBSD specific dts files. We are trying to = remove these as drivers are updated to handle the common bindings. I have also spoken with some NetBSD and OpenBSD developers. They are = both using devicetree to handle device enumeration. Having all 5 = projects using a common set of dts files and binding would simplify = keeping them in sync. Andrew