Re: [PATCH 1/3] dt-bindings: added new pwm-sifive driver documentation

From: Andreas FÃrber
Date: Mon Apr 30 2018 - 06:45:30 EST

Am 30.04.2018 um 10:19 schrieb Thierry Reding:
> On Sun, Apr 29, 2018 at 02:08:07PM -0700, Wesley Terpstra wrote:
>> On Sun, Apr 29, 2018 at 2:01 PM, Andreas FÃrber <afaerber@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> "pwm0" sounds like a zero-indexed instance of some pwm block. If 0 is
>>> the version here, I'd suggest to make it "pwm-0" for example - you might
>>> want to take a look at the Xilinx bindings, which use a strict x.yy suffix.
>> That's fine. I'll change it to pwm-0.00 in the next patch series.
> This should match the version that you use. If you're internal
> versioning uses single digits, or a single version number, then I think
> there's no need to use 0.00, because that would just be confusing.
> However I think it'd be good to make sure it is discernible as a version
> number. Perhaps something like sifive,pwm-v0. That seems to be a fairly
> common scheme.

Yes. My point was not to adopt another vendor's versioning scheme but to
adopt _some_ consistent scheme and document it, e.g., in a sifive.txt
similar to xilinx.txt:

It should be made clear what in the compatible string the version is
(thus my proposal of using a dash as separator), and there you may want
to document how to map between IP/documentation and compatibles for any
new bindings.


SUSE Linux GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 NÃrnberg, Germany
GF: Felix ImendÃrffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton
HRB 21284 (AG NÃrnberg)