Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932416Ab3ICSgM (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Sep 2013 14:36:12 -0400 Received: from avon.wwwdotorg.org ([70.85.31.133]:33745 "EHLO avon.wwwdotorg.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757352Ab3ICSgK (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Sep 2013 14:36:10 -0400 Message-ID: <52262C16.3020406@wwwdotorg.org> Date: Tue, 03 Sep 2013 12:36:06 -0600 From: Stephen Warren User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130803 Thunderbird/17.0.8 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Alexandre Courbot CC: Tomasz Figa , Alexandre Courbot , Russell King - ARM Linux , Dave Martin , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , "linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org" , devicetree@vger.kernel.org, Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/5] ARM: add basic Trusted Foundations support References: <1377770268-14014-1-git-send-email-acourbot@nvidia.com> <1377770268-14014-2-git-send-email-acourbot@nvidia.com> <2081838.eZHRxlDf7s@flatron> In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 1.4.6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1850 Lines: 44 On 09/02/2013 01:28 AM, Alexandre Courbot wrote: > Hi Tomasz! > > On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 5:20 PM, Tomasz Figa wrote: >>> +Required properties: >>> +- compatible : "tl,trusted-foundations" >>> +- version-major : major version number of Trusted Foundations firmware >>> +- version-minor: minor version number of Trusted Foundations firmware >> >> Hmm, maybe you could simply define a single version property that could >> have multiple cells? Like: >> >> firmware { >> compatible = "tl,trusted-foundations"; >> version = <2 8>; >> }; > > I'm fine this way too, but do we have other bindings that use the same > scheme? What is the general convention for version number bindings? I don't know if there are enough cases of this for there to be a convention. A 2-cell property seems fine to me. >>> + This option allows the kernel to invoke the secure monitor whenever >>> + required on devices using Trusted Foundations. >>> + >>> + Devices using Trusted Foundations should pass a device tree >>> containing + a node compatible with "tl,trusted-foundations" to >>> signal the presence + of the secure monitor. >> >> What about pointing to the documentation file instead? > > Yes, that would make more sense. Possibly. What about when the binding document is no longer part of the kernel though? Perhaps we could reference the documentation in some way other than by the pathname within the kernel source tree though, e.g. 'see the device tree binding documentation for compatible="tl,trusted-foundations"'? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/