Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] dt-bindings: mtd: Document Macronix raw NAND controller bindings

[Miquel Raynal]

Hi Mason,

masonccyang@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote on Fri, 28 Jun 2019 17:09:16 +0800:

> Hi Miquel,
> 
> > 
> > Please always Cc: Rob (robh+dt@xxxxxxxxxx) when you send bindings
> > related patches.  
> 
> Understood. thanks for your remind.
> 
> 
> > >   
> > > >   
> > > > > +- reg: should contain 1 entrie for the registers   
> > > > 
> > > >                            entry
> > > >   
> > > > > +- reg-names: should contain "regs"   
> > > > 
> > > > Not sure you need that?   
> > > 
> > > for a base address of ctlr registers.  
> > 
> > Yes I know, I mean: you don't necessarily need the 'reg-names' property
> > as it is supposed that the only entry will be the IP registers (unless
> > there are more). I don't know what's Rob preference here but I would
> > either drop the reg-names property or enhance the name, "regs" is
> > terribly not descriptive.  
> 
> Got it, any comment is appreciated for either drop the reg-names property 
> or enhance the name.
> 
> >   
> > > > > +- interrupts: interrupt line connected to this NAND controller
> > > > > +- clock-names: should contain "ps_clk", "send_clk" and   
> "send_dly_clk"
> > > > > +- clocks: should contain 3 entries for the "ps_clk", "send_clk"   
> and
> > > > > +    "send_dly_clk" clocks   
> > > > 
> > > > s/entries/phandles/ ?   
> > > 
> > > ?
> > > as I know that kernel views the phandle values as device tree   
> structure
> > > information instead of device tree data and thus does not store them   
> as
> > > properties.  
> > 
> > The bindings have nothing to do with the kernel views. They might
> > actually be merged in a different project, out of the kernel.
> >   
> 
> if patch to phandle, should we also patch driver to of_xxx_phandle()?

I don't understand your question. <&clk 1> is a phandle, you already
use phandles, it's just more precise than the word "entries".


Thanks,
MiquÃl