On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 04:47:38PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote:

Hi,

On 07/16/2014 03:13 PM, Thierry Reding wrote:

quoted

On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 01:49:57PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote:

quoted

Hi,

On 07/16/2014 01:40 PM, Mikko Perttunen wrote:

quoted

This patch adds device tree binding documentation for the SATA
controller found on NVIDIA Tegra SoCs.

Signed-off-by: Mikko Perttunen <mperttunen@nvidia.com>
---
v4: clarify mandatory clock order

Thanks this and the new v4 of "ata: Add support for the Tegra124 SATA controller"
both look good to me. So these 2 + v3 for the rest of the series are:

Acked-by: Hans de Goede <redacted>

Like I said in my reply to PATCH v3 7/8, I think this mandatory clock
order is a mistake.

We've plenty of other dt bindings where things need to be specified in
a certain order, e.g. registers. So I don't really see what the problem
is here.

Like I said, the clock-names exists so that drivers can request a clock
by name. Therefore the order in which they are listed doesn't matter.
The only thing that matters is that the entries in clocks and
clock-names match up.

With the libahci_platform code we completely annul that convention.

Thierry