From: Luca Ceresoli <luca@lucaceresoli.net>
To: Wolfram Sang <wsa@the-dreams.de>
Cc: "open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS"
<devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
"Kieran Bingham" <kieran@ksquared.org.uk>,
"Alexandre Belloni" <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>,
"Linux Kernel Mailing List" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"Jacopo Mondi" <jacopo@jmondi.org>,
"Vladimir Zapolskiy" <vz@mleia.com>,
Linux-Renesas <linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org>,
"Wolfram Sang" <wsa+renesas@sang-engineering.com>,
"Geert Uytterhoeven" <geert@linux-m68k.org>,
"Linux I2C" <linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org>,
"Niklas Söderlund" <niklas.soderlund@ragnatech.se>,
linux-i3c@lists.infradead.org,
"Laurent Pinchart" <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 3/7] i2c: allow DT nodes without 'compatible'
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2020 15:47:14 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <62896a27-9df0-ef84-9724-2ff34b9bc9a7@lucaceresoli.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200312111950.GA1013@ninjato>
Hi Wolfram,
On 12/03/20 12:19, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> Hi Luca,
>
>> But the kernel currently ignores nodes that have no matching driver,
>> right? So in this case the kernel knows that that address is used, but
>> ignores this information and considers the address as available.
>
> I'd rather call it "unbound" than available. See later.
>
>> Seen in this perspective, we should have a "compatible" for all nodes:
>> it is just describing the hardware and could be out of the kernel
>> control. But instead of discarding all nodes without a matching driver,
>
> And what compatible value would you use if you know there is something
> sitting there and don't know what? This is what this series aims to
> address because we thought a compatible name like "reserved" would not
> be a good idea.
The scenario I have in mind is when DT has a proper compatible string,
but the kernel has no driver for that chip. Could be not implemented or
simply not compiled.
There are 3 cases generally:
1. compatible string present, kernel has a matching driver
2. compatible string present, kernel has no matching driver
3. compatible string not present
Case 1 is obvious. Case 3 is currently ignored, with your patch the
address will be reserved. Case 2 is currently ignored, but we have all
the information to reserve the address just like in case 2, but there's
no plan to reserve it. Why not? (not necessarily in this series, I'm
just trying to understand if the idea is correct)
--
Luca
_______________________________________________
linux-i3c mailing list
linux-i3c@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-i3c
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-04-10 13:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-02-20 17:23 [RFC PATCH 0/7] i2c: of: reserve unknown and ancillary addresses Wolfram Sang
2020-02-20 17:23 ` [RFC PATCH 1/7] i2c: add sanity check for parameter of i2c_verify_client() Wolfram Sang
2020-02-21 9:36 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2020-02-20 17:23 ` [RFC PATCH 2/7] i2c: use DEFINE for the dummy driver name Wolfram Sang
2020-02-21 9:38 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2020-02-20 17:23 ` [RFC PATCH 3/7] i2c: allow DT nodes without 'compatible' Wolfram Sang
2020-02-21 9:45 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2020-02-21 9:48 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2020-02-23 23:11 ` Luca Ceresoli
2020-03-12 11:19 ` Wolfram Sang
2020-03-12 11:44 ` Alexandre Belloni
2020-04-10 13:47 ` Luca Ceresoli [this message]
2020-02-26 16:30 ` Rob Herring
2020-02-20 17:24 ` [RFC PATCH 4/7] i2c: of: remove superfluous parameter from exported function Wolfram Sang
2020-02-21 9:50 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2020-02-24 8:12 ` Luca Ceresoli
2020-02-20 17:24 ` [RFC PATCH 5/7] i2c: of: error message unification Wolfram Sang
2020-02-21 9:54 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2020-02-20 17:24 ` [RFC PATCH 6/7] i2c: of: mark a whole array of regs as reserved Wolfram Sang
2020-02-21 10:09 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2020-03-12 11:21 ` Wolfram Sang
2020-03-18 14:33 ` Wolfram Sang
2020-02-28 12:11 ` Luca Ceresoli
2020-02-20 17:24 ` [RFC PATCH 7/7] i2c: core: hand over reserved devices when requesting ancillary addresses Wolfram Sang
2020-02-21 10:13 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2020-02-28 12:11 ` Luca Ceresoli
2020-03-12 11:30 ` Wolfram Sang
2020-03-12 11:21 ` Wolfram Sang
2020-03-13 12:42 ` Wolfram Sang
2020-02-21 10:15 ` [RFC PATCH 0/7] i2c: of: reserve unknown and " Geert Uytterhoeven
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=62896a27-9df0-ef84-9724-2ff34b9bc9a7@lucaceresoli.net \
--to=luca@lucaceresoli.net \
--cc=alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=geert@linux-m68k.org \
--cc=jacopo@jmondi.org \
--cc=kieran@ksquared.org.uk \
--cc=laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com \
--cc=linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-i3c@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=niklas.soderlund@ragnatech.se \
--cc=vz@mleia.com \
--cc=wsa+renesas@sang-engineering.com \
--cc=wsa@the-dreams.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).