From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S964824Ab3HIPCM (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 Aug 2013 11:02:12 -0400 Received: from mailout3.w1.samsung.com ([210.118.77.13]:55696 "EHLO mailout3.w1.samsung.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S934064Ab3HIPCH (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 Aug 2013 11:02:07 -0400 X-AuditID: cbfec7f5-b7f5f6d00000105f-60-5205046d989f From: Tomasz Figa To: Rob Herring Cc: Cho KyongHo , Tomasz Figa , Linux ARM Kernel , Linux IOMMU , Linux Kernel , Linux Samsung SOC , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" , Joerg Roedel , Kukjin Kim , Prathyush , Rahul Sharma , Subash Patel , Grant Grundler , Antonios Motakis , kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, Sachin Kamat Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 07/16] iommu/exynos: support for device tree Date: Fri, 09 Aug 2013 17:02:02 +0200 Message-id: <33568604.vCtP4hvQ1q@amdc1227> Organization: Samsung Poland R&D Center User-Agent: KMail/4.10.5 (Linux/3.10.1-gentoo; KDE/4.10.5; x86_64; ; ) In-reply-to: References: <002b01ce941b$160a88a0$421f99e0$@samsung.com> <20130809153730.83d3a5ba419def5424bcbb0e@samsung.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-transfer-encoding: 7Bit Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFprCIsWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsVy+t/xa7q5LKxBBqefKlrcuXuO1WL+ESDx 6sgPJosF+60tOmdvYLfoXXCVzeLjqePsFpseX2O1uLxrDpvFjPP7mCwurNjIbvGv9yCjxZRF h1ktvn/7xmZx8k8vo0XL9V4mi1W7/jA6CHo8OTiPyWN2w0UWj52z7rJ73Lm2h83j/KY1zB6b l9R7TL6xnNGjb8sqRo/Pm+Q8rhw9wxTAFcVlk5Kak1mWWqRvl8CVsX1xH2PBTIGKBa2zmBoY T/J0MXJySAiYSKxrX8oGYYtJXLi3Hsjm4hASWMoocfXBXlYIp4tJ4srPAywgVWwCahKfGx6B dYgIqEt8W34crINZ4AyrxKZtl5lBEsICzhKzV59hBbFZBFQlDu1uZQKxeQW0JHbt/sMOYvMD Nb/b9hQozsEhKuAmMeFjPkiYUyBYovHzVSaIxTsYJeZdfMwK0Sso8WPyPbAjmAXkJfbtn8oK YWtJrN95nGkCo+AsJGWzkJTNQlK2gJF5FaNoamlyQXFSeq6RXnFibnFpXrpecn7uJkZITH7d wbj0mNUhRgEORiUe3gm/WIKEWBPLiitzDzFKcDArifD+/gkU4k1JrKxKLcqPLyrNSS0+xMjE wSnVwGjxKf/XRK1gZa4/bo/Tj112v7W27oWZlJKl9/W/HicbP4qt/7ZcqCP4sAhPwqyt/n8f 3j295g3HpJPLFszUtvSxbUtjrODolg6p2PJHP+OtqEPWwyq5ew0Ptp9fFts563O1lQ2ja6RO xap1+evclk5dEFB6xbr27K3O/AYX6bZ33D+c/n2Vs1diKc5INNRiLipOBABfgu/UpwIAAA== Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Friday 09 of August 2013 08:28:09 Rob Herring wrote: > On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 1:37 AM, Cho KyongHo wrote: > > On Fri, 09 Aug 2013 00:41:25 +0200, Tomasz Figa wrote: > >> Hi KyongHo, > >> > >> On Thursday 08 of August 2013 18:38:49 Cho KyongHo wrote: > >> > This commit adds device tree support for System MMU. > >> > This also include the following changes and enhancements: > >> > > >> > * use managed device helper functions. > >> > Simplyfies System MMU device driver. > >> > > >> > * use only a single clock descriptor. > >> > System MMU device descriptor is seperate if it is imposible to make > >> > a single clock descriptor to make a device descriptor for a group of > >> > System MMUs. > >> > > >> > * removed dbgname member from sysmmu_drvdata structure. > >> > debugging kernel message for a System MMU is distinguisheable with > >> > the > >> > name of device descroptors. > >> > >> Please put all these three changes in separate patches. This patch is > >> hard to review with all the changes mixed together... > > Agreed. > > > Ok. > > > >> In addition, I believe this is the patch that should be adding device > >> tree binding documentation, not the 6/16 one, as this is where > >> actually support for this binding gets added to the kernel. > > > > Oh, I didn't know that devicetree binding description and > > implementation need to be in the same patch. > > I will do as you advised. > > Actually, I prefer the binding docs be separate patches. The reason > being so we can get closer to having them in a separate repository. > Also, then the binding can be acked separately from the kernel > implementation using the binding. OK. This is a good point. So maybe let's fully define this order to be as following (and have first best practice for the DT binding best practices that need to be defined): Bindings documentation should be added with a separate patch, before any user of these bindings is introduced. What do you think? Best regards, Tomasz