Re: [PATCH v7 4/6] dt-bindings: mailbox: imx-mu: add i.MX6SX and i.MX7S SoCs.

[Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>]

On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 03:25:15PM +0530, Jassi Brar wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 12:23 PM, Oleksij Rempel
> <o.rempel@pengutronix.de> wrote:
> > This are currently tested SoCs with imx-mailbox driver.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Oleksij Rempel <o.rempel@pengutronix.de>
> > ---
> >  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mailbox/fsl,mu.txt | 2 +-
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mailbox/fsl,mu.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mailbox/fsl,mu.txt
> > index 113d6ab931ef..5616d2afca45 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mailbox/fsl,mu.txt
> > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mailbox/fsl,mu.txt
> > @@ -18,7 +18,7 @@ Messaging Unit Device Node:
> >  Required properties:
> >  -------------------
> >  - compatible : should be "fsl,<chip>-mu", the supported chips include
> > -               imx8qxp, imx8qm.
> > +               imx6sx, imx7s, imx8qxp, imx8qm.
> >
> This is not scalable. Do we add every new SoC that contains the same controller?
> I think the controller name, if it has one or create a new one like
> 'imx-mu',  should be used here.
> So,
>     compatible : should be "fsl,imx-mu"

No, for all the reasons already correctly explained in this thread.

> BTW, the driver doesn't even probe anything other than
> 'fsl,imx6sx-mu', unlike what the binding says.

This aspect should be documented here though. The documentation should 
clearly define what are valid combinations of compatibles.

Rob