Am 18.08.2014 18:10, schrieb Stephen Warren:

On 08/16/2014 09:20 AM, Andreas F?rber wrote:

quoted

Am 13.08.2014 21:14, schrieb Dylan Reid:

quoted

+    pinmux: pinmux at 0,70000868 {
+        pinctrl-names = "default";
+        pinctrl-0 = <&pinmux_default>;
+
+        pinmux_default: common {
+            dap_mclk1_pw4 {

Any need to have the nodes this way? Shouldn't this rather be
dap-mclk1-pw4 as node name by conventions, with a dap_mclk1_pw4 label
for referencing if needed? Same below, obviously.

Underscores are consistent with at least all the other Tegra DTs, so I
think this is best as is.

quoted

quoted

+    pwm: pwm at 0,7000a000 {

Add the label to the .dtsi where the node is first declared? Then you
can override it the safer &pwm { ... }; way. Same for all other nodes
being extended/overridden here - that's what your colleagues requested
for Spring. It'll help with the 80 char limit further below by reducing
indentation.

We certainly do have the pwm label in *.dtsi for other SoCs, so we
should probably move the label there.

Using the &pwm {} syntax would be inconsistent with all the other Tegra
DTs, and isn't really any safer; the HW isn't going to change, so once
this is written, it should continue to "just work".

For exactly those consistency reasons I was asked to refactor the whole
set of exynos5250-*.dts files despite having no relation to them -
turning my 1 .dts patch into a large series that still isn't applied...

It's funny and disappointing that every Linux maintainer seems to have
their own conventions, and not even the Google Chrome people can agree
on a common style or live up to what they ask of others.

As for &pwm {}, I understood it's "safer" in that mismatches in the node
name will lead to compilation errors rather than silent runtime misbehavior.

Regards,
Andreas

-- 
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 N?rnberg, Germany
GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imend?rffer; HRB 16746 AG N?rnberg