Re: [Question] directory for SoC-related DT binding
- Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2018 14:16:53 +0200
- From: Stefan Wahren <stefan.wahren@xxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [Question] directory for SoC-related DT binding
Am 10.10.2018 um 14:09 schrieb Russell King - ARM Linux:
> On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 02:04:14PM +0200, Stefan Wahren wrote:
>> Am 10.10.2018 um 13:19 schrieb Rob Herring:
>>> On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 6:08 AM Masahiro Yamada
>>> <yamada.masahiro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>> I see a bunch of vendor (or SoC) names in
>>> Yeah, it's kind of a mixture of board/soc bindings mostly with some
>>> ARM architecture, ARM, Ltd. IP, and SoC system reg bindings.
>>> Eventually, I'd like to not split board bindings by arch and maybe we
>>> should move all the system/misc reg bindings out.
>>>> I also see some vendor names in
>>> This I believe is mostly SoC system reg bindings though there's
>>> probably a few other things.
>>>> Confusingly, I see bcm, mediatek, rockchip
>>>> in both locations.
>>>> Is there any rule to choose one than the other?
>>> Top-level SoC/board bindings in arm/ and anything else elsewhere ideally.
>> in case of Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/bcm the directory
>> contains SoC / board bindings, cpu-enable and a firmware binding.
> I think you're confused there...
> $ ls -1 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/bcm/
> Doesn't look like SoC/board bindings to me...
> $ ls -1 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/bcm/
> does fit with your description, except for the directory path...
sorry, my fault i copied the wrong path. I actually thought of
Thanks for pointing out