From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S932447AbdJZV4g (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Thu, 26 Oct 2017 17:56:36 -0400
Received: from vps0.lunn.ch ([185.16.172.187]:59106 "EHLO vps0.lunn.ch"
        rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
        id S932326AbdJZV4e (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Thu, 26 Oct 2017 17:56:34 -0400
Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2017 23:56:29 +0200
From: Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>
To: Jose Abreu <Jose.Abreu@synopsys.com>
Cc: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Joao Pinto <Joao.Pinto@synopsys.com>,
        Giuseppe Cavallaro <peppe.cavallaro@st.com>,
        Alexandre Torgue <alexandre.torgue@st.com>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 2/2] bindings: net: stmmac: Add documentation
 for TSN parameters
Message-ID: <20171026215629.GB8489@lunn.ch>
References: <cover.1508938927.git.joabreu@synopsys.com>
 <ef1d220cf792c74ae278e0200ca4763f9ab62d3e.1508938927.git.joabreu@synopsys.com>
 <c2a4a435-0b0b-4fa3-a69a-280f6d0c6427@gmail.com>
 <23152048-09fe-2950-e1ff-8cf90ca3f465@synopsys.com>
 <20171026090308.GD20299@lunn.ch>
 <867d6d43-9df7-4097-db5a-f2049236394f@synopsys.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <867d6d43-9df7-4097-db5a-f2049236394f@synopsys.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

> About my patches, what I think would be better now would be to
> drop the configuration by DT and integrate the remaining
> configuration, letting the EST parameters be populated by SoC
> specific wrappers.

Hi Jose

The problem with SoC specific wrappers is that you are going to have
to remove them once the real interface is defined. Anybody who uses
your SoC specific wrappers is going to have to re-write their code,
when it all gets ripped out.

You generally don't add device SoC specific wrappers. Imagine if
everybody did that. Lots of different ways of doing the same thing.
My suggesting is to keep your patches out for the moment, waiting for
generic support to be added.

     Andrew