Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Subject: Re: [Question] directory for SoC-related DT binding
To:     Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@armlinux.org.uk>
Cc:     Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>,
        Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
        devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Frank Rowand <frowand.list@gmail.com>,
        linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>
References: <CAK7LNATaD=G8BW316fkBWM2A+YXgP5tabaySR2Fs49Za_0p=3Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <CABGGisx-iLr+CQ=JjmHEe5J_Qqpf0yrgOmSOHa74GnfwE_RKsA@mail.gmail.com>
 <93cd9c43-6fe3-c691-005b-e27cf101c7d6@i2se.com>
 <20181010120955.GQ30658@n2100.armlinux.org.uk>
From:   Stefan Wahren <stefan.wahren@i2se.com>
Message-ID: <af9eec6f-cb31-f23e-61b4-da1364ea7ba5@i2se.com>
Date:   Wed, 10 Oct 2018 14:16:53 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/52.9.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20181010120955.GQ30658@n2100.armlinux.org.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Language: en-US
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

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:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Am 10.10.2018 um 13:19 schrieb Rob Herring:
>>> On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 6:08 AM Masahiro Yamada
>>> <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com> wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I see a bunch of vendor (or SoC) names in
>>>> Documentation/device/bindings/arm/
>>>>
>>>> ./Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/altera
>>>> ./Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/amlogic
>>> 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
>>>> Documentation/device/bindings/soc/
>>>>
>>>> ./Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/bcm
>>>> ./Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/dove
>>>> ./Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/fsl
>>>> ./Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/mediatek
>>>> ./Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/qcom
>>>> ./Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/rockchip
>>>> ./Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/ti
>>>> ./Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/xilinx
>>>> ./Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/zte
>>> 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/
> brcm,bcm2835-vchiq.txt
> raspberrypi,bcm2835-power.txt
>
> Doesn't look like SoC/board bindings to me...
>
> whereas:
>
> $ ls -1 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/bcm/
> brcm,bcm11351-cpu-method.txt
> brcm,bcm11351.txt
> brcm,bcm21664.txt
> brcm,bcm23550-cpu-method.txt
> brcm,bcm23550.txt
> brcm,bcm2835.txt
> brcm,bcm4708.txt
> brcm,bcm63138.txt
> brcm,brcmstb.txt
> brcm,cygnus.txt
> brcm,hr2.txt
> brcm,ns2.txt
> brcm,nsp-cpu-method.txt
> brcm,nsp.txt
> brcm,stingray.txt
> brcm,vulcan-soc.txt
> raspberrypi,bcm2835-firmware.txt
>
> does fit with your description, except for the directory path...

sorry, my fault i copied the wrong path. I actually thought of
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/bcm/

Thanks for pointing out