On Sat, Aug 10, 2013 at 10:31:37AM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
Right, so what you're proposing is to come up with a DT description for the existing stuff, and then have to change (or at the very least augment) that description later when the DPCM stuff goes in.
What should be done is to sort out DPCM, get that working and then sort out the DT side of it, so that everyone gets only one transition to DT, not a transition to a half-baked stop-gap DT and then have to go through another round of DT changes. "Because we can" is not a good enough reason not to get this sorted properly.
Since we know what the hardware physically looks like we should be able to write a DT binding which can be stable for both before and after the DPCM transition. The bindings would have to be truly awful to require a rewrite here and as with all the DMA wrapper drivers if parts of DPCM that don't reflect actual hardware are appearing in the DT we're doing something wrong.