From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754491AbcK1IKJ (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Nov 2016 03:10:09 -0500 Received: from metis.ext.4.pengutronix.de ([92.198.50.35]:46521 "EHLO metis.ext.4.pengutronix.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754112AbcK1IKA (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Nov 2016 03:10:00 -0500 Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2016 09:09:40 +0100 From: Uwe =?iso-8859-1?Q?Kleine-K=F6nig?= To: Andrew Lunn , Rob Herring , Frank Rowand Cc: Andreas =?iso-8859-1?Q?F=E4rber?= , netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Michal Hrusecki , Tomas Hlavacek , Bed??icha Ko??atu , Vivien Didelot , Florian Fainelli , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: Add 88E6176 device tree support Message-ID: <20161128080939.ippqlytvojitefkp@perseus.defre.kleine-koenig.org> References: <1480280279-9552-1-git-send-email-afaerber@suse.de> <1480280279-9552-2-git-send-email-afaerber@suse.de> <20161127212709.GD13318@lunn.ch> <9500470d-09c3-3ecb-994b-3d108bffc99e@suse.de> <20161127220846.GH13318@lunn.ch> <20161127231009.GA17704@lunn.ch> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="f5cgf4jnlrji24wl" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20161127231009.GA17704@lunn.ch> User-Agent: NeoMutt/20161104 (1.7.1) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 2001:67c:670:100:1d::c0 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: ukl@pengutronix.de X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on metis.ext.pengutronix.de); SAEximRunCond expanded to false X-PTX-Original-Recipient: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --f5cgf4jnlrji24wl Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hello Andrew, On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 12:10:09AM +0100, Andrew Lunn wrote: > > Try to see it from my perspective: I see that some vf610 device I don't > > have (found via `git grep marvell,mv88e6` or so) uses > > "marvell,mv88e6085". I then assume it has that device on board. How > > would I know it doesn't? Same for the other boards you mention. > >=20 > > Unfortunately some of your replies are slightly cryptic. Had you simply > > replied 'please just use "marvell,mv88e6085" instead', it would've been > > much more clear what you want. (Same for extending the subject instead > > of just pointing to some FAQ.) >=20 > By reading the FAQ you have learnt more than me saying put the correct > tree in the subject line. By asking you to explain why you need a > compatible string, i'm trying to make you think, look at the code and > understand it. In the future, you might think and understand the code > before posting a patch, and then we all save time. I agree to Andreas though, that it makes an school teacher impression. Something like: Please fix the subject. Check the FAQ for the details, which btw is worth a read completely. is IMHO better in this regard and once you found the problem there you don't need to ask back if it's that what was meant. > > So are you okay with patch 1/2 documenting the compatible? Then we could > > drop 2/2 and use "marvell,mv88e6176", "marvell,mv88e6085" instead of > > just the latter. Or would you rather drop both and keep the actual chip > > a comment? >=20 > A comment only please. I still wonder (and didn't get an answer back when I asked about this) why a comment is preferred here. For other devices I know it's usual and requested by the maintainers to use: compatible =3D "exact name", "earlyer device to match driver"; =2E This is more robust, documents the situation more formally and makes it better greppable. The price to pay is only a few bytes in the dtb which IMO is ok. Best regards Uwe --f5cgf4jnlrji24wl Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAABCgAdFiEEfnIqFpAYrP8+dKQLwfwUeK3K7AkFAlg75kAACgkQwfwUeK3K 7Amp1Af8Djhoytsdm7xFsAHwRRAmvzasbH0hBOEkn1cRn8GWH6J58pFJs9qyAMZY C+9apAJW+CaEp4dONvDBvx8oHegxwK7MQIkjhOmo0rnx7Kw54m7bcdFIGsNbdyI5 ZifbKVVIlKrC5grulckNRWsvOJJaxc44zFVI9yg+okQIZEPv1Xtu0HWvp3Xc8ORA 7W31OolUYPdtguiw9Xh59P+/85ob1akxb+cC7+19hhrMCFF6WbIjXdAs596lc1Rj HcyEfmyLhpZFodQC5YDIWqe/Y0H+pC4FF6H7B2PWab/6FshzklssYda29D2oYdG2 obHoL1O4X3Ipr2dDw+QLVcobyQ2nyA== =KSyR -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --f5cgf4jnlrji24wl-- From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: uwe@kleine-koenig.org (Uwe =?iso-8859-1?Q?Kleine-K=F6nig?=) Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2016 09:09:40 +0100 Subject: [PATCH 2/2] net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: Add 88E6176 device tree support In-Reply-To: <20161127231009.GA17704@lunn.ch> References: <1480280279-9552-1-git-send-email-afaerber@suse.de> <1480280279-9552-2-git-send-email-afaerber@suse.de> <20161127212709.GD13318@lunn.ch> <9500470d-09c3-3ecb-994b-3d108bffc99e@suse.de> <20161127220846.GH13318@lunn.ch> <20161127231009.GA17704@lunn.ch> Message-ID: <20161128080939.ippqlytvojitefkp@perseus.defre.kleine-koenig.org> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Hello Andrew, On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 12:10:09AM +0100, Andrew Lunn wrote: > > Try to see it from my perspective: I see that some vf610 device I don't > > have (found via `git grep marvell,mv88e6` or so) uses > > "marvell,mv88e6085". I then assume it has that device on board. How > > would I know it doesn't? Same for the other boards you mention. > > > > Unfortunately some of your replies are slightly cryptic. Had you simply > > replied 'please just use "marvell,mv88e6085" instead', it would've been > > much more clear what you want. (Same for extending the subject instead > > of just pointing to some FAQ.) > > By reading the FAQ you have learnt more than me saying put the correct > tree in the subject line. By asking you to explain why you need a > compatible string, i'm trying to make you think, look at the code and > understand it. In the future, you might think and understand the code > before posting a patch, and then we all save time. I agree to Andreas though, that it makes an school teacher impression. Something like: Please fix the subject. Check the FAQ for the details, which btw is worth a read completely. is IMHO better in this regard and once you found the problem there you don't need to ask back if it's that what was meant. > > So are you okay with patch 1/2 documenting the compatible? Then we could > > drop 2/2 and use "marvell,mv88e6176", "marvell,mv88e6085" instead of > > just the latter. Or would you rather drop both and keep the actual chip > > a comment? > > A comment only please. I still wonder (and didn't get an answer back when I asked about this) why a comment is preferred here. For other devices I know it's usual and requested by the maintainers to use: compatible = "exact name", "earlyer device to match driver"; . This is more robust, documents the situation more formally and makes it better greppable. The price to pay is only a few bytes in the dtb which IMO is ok. Best regards Uwe -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 488 bytes Desc: not available URL: