Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Tue, 8 Oct 2013 11:53:36 +0200 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v10] dmaengine: Add MOXA ART DMA engine driver | From | Jonas Jensen <> |
| |
On 7 October 2013 17:12, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com> wrote: > Sorry I didn't notice this previously, but "moxa" isn't in > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.txt (despite several > bindings using it). Could you cook up a separate patch to add an entry > for Moxa, please?
Yes, I'll submit a separate patch.
> Also, given the SoC is called "ART" it's a shame that we're calling this > "moxa,moxart-dma" rather than "moxa,art-dma". We already have precedent > for "moxart" in bindings though, so changing that's likely to lead to > more problems.
Sorry about that, I think the "moxart" contraction was suggested and has been sticky ever since.
It's at least a little appropriate because the physical chip text reads "MOXA ART" (photo):
https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-A-2FXDrObU8/UMcMc_K2vEI/AAAAAAAABwg/ldaLZ7ps1P4/w1331-h998-no/UC-7112-LX-picture4.jpg
Currently three drivers in linux-next use the name with accompanying device tree bindings. Considering the amount of patches required, can we keep the name, please?
> Sorry for yet more pendantry, but could we instead have: > > - interrupts: Should contain an interrupt-specifier for the sole > interrupt generated by the device.
Fixed in v11.
Regards, Jonas
|  |