From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751864AbbKJSoi (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Nov 2015 13:44:38 -0500 Received: from mezzanine.sirena.org.uk ([106.187.55.193]:54441 "EHLO mezzanine.sirena.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751066AbbKJSog (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Nov 2015 13:44:36 -0500 Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2015 18:44:08 +0000 From: Mark Brown To: "Andrew F. Davis" Cc: Rob Herring , Pawel Moll , Mark Rutland , Ian Campbell , Kumar Gala , Lee Jones , Alexandre Courbot , Grygorii Strashko , devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <20151110184408.GJ12392@sirena.org.uk> References: <20151105101417.GM1717@sirena.org.uk> <563B9A10.4020907@ti.com> <20151106104322.GA18409@sirena.org.uk> <563CED25.6020405@ti.com> <20151106211651.GJ18409@sirena.org.uk> <5640DAC0.9080008@ti.com> <20151110095719.GC12392@sirena.org.uk> <56421FA5.1020103@ti.com> <20151110170447.GI12392@sirena.org.uk> <56422ECC.6070603@ti.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="2fjX3cMESU3XgGmZ" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <56422ECC.6070603@ti.com> X-Cookie: We have DIFFERENT amounts of HAIR -- User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 94.175.94.161 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: broonie@sirena.org.uk Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 4/5] regulator: tps65912: Add regulator driver for the TPS65912 PMIC X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Mon, 26 Dec 2011 16:24:06 +0000) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mezzanine.sirena.org.uk) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --2fjX3cMESU3XgGmZ Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 11:52:12AM -0600, Andrew F. Davis wrote: > Anyway, All I'm trying to do here is keep things clean in the DT. We only have > one consistent option: No, not really. > Match all sub parts by compatible: > Or we end up with some hybrid approach, matching some on node name, others > on compatible when needed. Yes, the above matches Linux device model (still > not sure why that is such a problem?), but it also matches modular functionality > in the device. There's also the third option where we don't have any compatible strings in the subnodes at all. --2fjX3cMESU3XgGmZ Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJWQjr4AAoJECTWi3JdVIfQ6PYH/1pAF1iayHDGONFRofUFWIX6 8M0D6UY+xdGfDexB7q4/vcZpXROC3Q0XG/IM+xRin5BhjHR35gikQvGrmxYEwas6 +9Uwu4jRPteFqNHozTRBv4pWwUaJbo13uA0GEayEAbYA2HSMUAYSRHQjXR2yxEwH MgGxUjD16yBv70GE7njuUsqXw7XFaeICMhX/NiHhORUCc/DjvsfvrcDGOrQyvERM 1ojR3GKzgi4IdyXxyO7odJhcUnjvF/XI4ssW3yaRMjdczOhvB5wPjvqrqVF8yZ1q Xn1sjXwmhp+kVvSQ9/hU5Oh/Yf7eOSy0h8qjUXBr0Mfx3qQFydCww/2ga18okbA= =mvAw -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --2fjX3cMESU3XgGmZ--