* [PATCH v2] drm/i2c: tda998x: Change the compatible strings
@ 2014-03-21 13:37 ` Sebastian Hesselbarth
0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Sebastian Hesselbarth @ 2014-03-21 13:37 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
On 03/21/2014 11:55 AM, Jean-Francois Moine wrote:
> The tda998x driver accepts only 3 chips from the TDA998x family.
> This patch changes the driver compatible strings to these chips.
Jean-Francois,
be careful with building a DT binding from a Linux driver. Although
we constantly struggle to define a binding independent of Linux, it
should not reflect what Linux is capable of but describe the HW in
general.
> Signed-off-by: Jean-Francois Moine <moinejf@free.fr>
> ---
> v2: change the subject to drm/i2c
> This patch applies after
> drm/i2c: tda998x: Fix lack of required reg in DT documentation
> ---
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/drm/i2c/tda998x.txt | 4 ++--
> drivers/gpu/drm/i2c/tda998x_drv.c | 4 +++-
> 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/drm/i2c/tda998x.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/drm/i2c/tda998x.txt
> index fc7effa..e3f3d65 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/drm/i2c/tda998x.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/drm/i2c/tda998x.txt
> @@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
> Device-Tree bindings for the NXP TDA998x HDMI transmitter
>
> Required properties;
> - - compatible: must be "nxp,tda998x"
> + - compatible: may be "nxp,tda9989", "nxp,tda19988" or "nxp,tda19989"
There is a "DT is ABI" policy and although there is no mainline Linux
user of current compatible, the correct way would be to deprecate
"nxp,tda998x" and introduce new compatibles.
Also, as long as we don't know about any major differences between
9989, 1998[89] it is fine to just have one of them defined. As soon
as we discover any difference that cannot be solved in another way,
we can add a new compatible.
What we _know_ is that 998[134] are different from 9989,1998[89]
with respect to additional CEC feature. But we also _know_ that the
exact version/revision of 9989,1998[89] can be probed from i2c
registers.
DT maintainers will know better, but as long as we have no prove that
998[134] can also be properly distinguished by i2c registers, just add
"nxp,tda9989" (which was probably the first revision released) and
assume 1998[89] are "compatible enough". Or add all three and make
"nxp,tda9989" the mandatory compatible.
You can leave out 998[134] for now.
> - reg: I2C address
>
The line above and below reg property look like there is a tab. If
so, can you please get rid of the blank line above and fix the line
below?
> @@ -20,7 +20,7 @@ Optional properties:
> Example:
>
> tda998x: hdmi-encoder {
> - compatible = "nxp,tda998x";
> + compatible = "nxp,tda19988";
Depending on above decision this becomes either
compatible = "nxp,tda9989";
or
compatible = "nxp,tda19988", "nxp,tda9989";
> reg = <0x70>;
> interrupt-parent = <&gpio0>;
> interrupts = <27 2>; /* falling edge */
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i2c/tda998x_drv.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i2c/tda998x_drv.c
> index 48af5ca..fd6751c 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i2c/tda998x_drv.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i2c/tda998x_drv.c
> @@ -1367,7 +1367,9 @@ fail:
>
> #ifdef CONFIG_OF
> static const struct of_device_id tda998x_dt_ids[] = {
> - { .compatible = "nxp,tda998x", },
> + { .compatible = "nxp,tda9989", },
> + { .compatible = "nxp,tda19988", },
> + { .compatible = "nxp,tda19989", },
Independent of the decision above, just "nxp,tda9989" is
sufficient.
Sebastian
> { }
> };
> MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, tda998x_dt_ids);
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH v2] drm/i2c: tda998x: Change the compatible strings
@ 2014-03-21 13:37 ` Sebastian Hesselbarth
0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Sebastian Hesselbarth @ 2014-03-21 13:37 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jean-Francois Moine, Russell King - ARM Linux,
devicetree-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA
Cc: linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r,
dri-devel-PD4FTy7X32lNgt0PjOBp9y5qC8QIuHrW,
linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA
On 03/21/2014 11:55 AM, Jean-Francois Moine wrote:
> The tda998x driver accepts only 3 chips from the TDA998x family.
> This patch changes the driver compatible strings to these chips.
Jean-Francois,
be careful with building a DT binding from a Linux driver. Although
we constantly struggle to define a binding independent of Linux, it
should not reflect what Linux is capable of but describe the HW in
general.
> Signed-off-by: Jean-Francois Moine <moinejf-GANU6spQydw@public.gmane.org>
> ---
> v2: change the subject to drm/i2c
> This patch applies after
> drm/i2c: tda998x: Fix lack of required reg in DT documentation
> ---
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/drm/i2c/tda998x.txt | 4 ++--
> drivers/gpu/drm/i2c/tda998x_drv.c | 4 +++-
> 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/drm/i2c/tda998x.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/drm/i2c/tda998x.txt
> index fc7effa..e3f3d65 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/drm/i2c/tda998x.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/drm/i2c/tda998x.txt
> @@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
> Device-Tree bindings for the NXP TDA998x HDMI transmitter
>
> Required properties;
> - - compatible: must be "nxp,tda998x"
> + - compatible: may be "nxp,tda9989", "nxp,tda19988" or "nxp,tda19989"
There is a "DT is ABI" policy and although there is no mainline Linux
user of current compatible, the correct way would be to deprecate
"nxp,tda998x" and introduce new compatibles.
Also, as long as we don't know about any major differences between
9989, 1998[89] it is fine to just have one of them defined. As soon
as we discover any difference that cannot be solved in another way,
we can add a new compatible.
What we _know_ is that 998[134] are different from 9989,1998[89]
with respect to additional CEC feature. But we also _know_ that the
exact version/revision of 9989,1998[89] can be probed from i2c
registers.
DT maintainers will know better, but as long as we have no prove that
998[134] can also be properly distinguished by i2c registers, just add
"nxp,tda9989" (which was probably the first revision released) and
assume 1998[89] are "compatible enough". Or add all three and make
"nxp,tda9989" the mandatory compatible.
You can leave out 998[134] for now.
> - reg: I2C address
>
The line above and below reg property look like there is a tab. If
so, can you please get rid of the blank line above and fix the line
below?
> @@ -20,7 +20,7 @@ Optional properties:
> Example:
>
> tda998x: hdmi-encoder {
> - compatible = "nxp,tda998x";
> + compatible = "nxp,tda19988";
Depending on above decision this becomes either
compatible = "nxp,tda9989";
or
compatible = "nxp,tda19988", "nxp,tda9989";
> reg = <0x70>;
> interrupt-parent = <&gpio0>;
> interrupts = <27 2>; /* falling edge */
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i2c/tda998x_drv.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i2c/tda998x_drv.c
> index 48af5ca..fd6751c 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i2c/tda998x_drv.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i2c/tda998x_drv.c
> @@ -1367,7 +1367,9 @@ fail:
>
> #ifdef CONFIG_OF
> static const struct of_device_id tda998x_dt_ids[] = {
> - { .compatible = "nxp,tda998x", },
> + { .compatible = "nxp,tda9989", },
> + { .compatible = "nxp,tda19988", },
> + { .compatible = "nxp,tda19989", },
Independent of the decision above, just "nxp,tda9989" is
sufficient.
Sebastian
> { }
> };
> MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, tda998x_dt_ids);
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH v2] drm/i2c: tda998x: Change the compatible strings
2014-03-21 13:37 ` Sebastian Hesselbarth
(?)
@ 2014-03-23 10:19 ` Jean-Francois Moine
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Jean-Francois Moine @ 2014-03-23 10:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Sebastian Hesselbarth
Cc: Russell King - ARM Linux, devicetree, linux-arm-kernel,
dri-devel, linux-kernel
On Fri, 21 Mar 2014 14:37:52 +0100
Sebastian Hesselbarth <sebastian.hesselbarth@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Required properties;
> > - - compatible: must be "nxp,tda998x"
> > + - compatible: may be "nxp,tda9989", "nxp,tda19988" or "nxp,tda19989"
>
> There is a "DT is ABI" policy and although there is no mainline Linux
> user of current compatible, the correct way would be to deprecate
> "nxp,tda998x" and introduce new compatibles.
Pratically, what is this way?
--
Ken ar c'hentañ | ** Breizh ha Linux atav! **
Jef | http://moinejf.free.fr/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v2] drm/i2c: tda998x: Change the compatible strings
@ 2014-03-23 10:19 ` Jean-Francois Moine
0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Jean-Francois Moine @ 2014-03-23 10:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
On Fri, 21 Mar 2014 14:37:52 +0100
Sebastian Hesselbarth <sebastian.hesselbarth@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Required properties;
> > - - compatible: must be "nxp,tda998x"
> > + - compatible: may be "nxp,tda9989", "nxp,tda19988" or "nxp,tda19989"
>
> There is a "DT is ABI" policy and although there is no mainline Linux
> user of current compatible, the correct way would be to deprecate
> "nxp,tda998x" and introduce new compatibles.
Pratically, what is this way?
--
Ken ar c'henta? | ** Breizh ha Linux atav! **
Jef | http://moinejf.free.fr/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2] drm/i2c: tda998x: Change the compatible strings
@ 2014-03-23 10:19 ` Jean-Francois Moine
0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Jean-Francois Moine @ 2014-03-23 10:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Sebastian Hesselbarth
Cc: devicetree, Russell King - ARM Linux, dri-devel,
linux-arm-kernel, linux-kernel
On Fri, 21 Mar 2014 14:37:52 +0100
Sebastian Hesselbarth <sebastian.hesselbarth@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Required properties;
> > - - compatible: must be "nxp,tda998x"
> > + - compatible: may be "nxp,tda9989", "nxp,tda19988" or "nxp,tda19989"
>
> There is a "DT is ABI" policy and although there is no mainline Linux
> user of current compatible, the correct way would be to deprecate
> "nxp,tda998x" and introduce new compatibles.
Pratically, what is this way?
--
Ken ar c'hentañ | ** Breizh ha Linux atav! **
Jef | http://moinejf.free.fr/
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2] drm/i2c: tda998x: Change the compatible strings
2014-03-23 10:19 ` Jean-Francois Moine
(?)
@ 2014-03-23 18:12 ` Sebastian Hesselbarth
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Sebastian Hesselbarth @ 2014-03-23 18:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jean-Francois Moine
Cc: Russell King - ARM Linux, devicetree, linux-arm-kernel,
dri-devel, linux-kernel
On 03/23/2014 11:19 AM, Jean-Francois Moine wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Mar 2014 14:37:52 +0100
> Sebastian Hesselbarth <sebastian.hesselbarth@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Required properties;
>>> - - compatible: must be "nxp,tda998x"
>>> + - compatible: may be "nxp,tda9989", "nxp,tda19988" or "nxp,tda19989"
>>
>> There is a "DT is ABI" policy and although there is no mainline Linux
>> user of current compatible, the correct way would be to deprecate
>> "nxp,tda998x" and introduce new compatibles.
>
> Pratically, what is this way?
Currently, there is no effective way to deprecate a binding or
compatible. You just add the one(s) that are more sensible and
you mark the old one as DEPRECATED by simply writing it in the
binding doc.
The driver should support the old binding at least for a while.
Sebastian
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v2] drm/i2c: tda998x: Change the compatible strings
@ 2014-03-23 18:12 ` Sebastian Hesselbarth
0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Sebastian Hesselbarth @ 2014-03-23 18:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
On 03/23/2014 11:19 AM, Jean-Francois Moine wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Mar 2014 14:37:52 +0100
> Sebastian Hesselbarth <sebastian.hesselbarth@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Required properties;
>>> - - compatible: must be "nxp,tda998x"
>>> + - compatible: may be "nxp,tda9989", "nxp,tda19988" or "nxp,tda19989"
>>
>> There is a "DT is ABI" policy and although there is no mainline Linux
>> user of current compatible, the correct way would be to deprecate
>> "nxp,tda998x" and introduce new compatibles.
>
> Pratically, what is this way?
Currently, there is no effective way to deprecate a binding or
compatible. You just add the one(s) that are more sensible and
you mark the old one as DEPRECATED by simply writing it in the
binding doc.
The driver should support the old binding at least for a while.
Sebastian
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2] drm/i2c: tda998x: Change the compatible strings
@ 2014-03-23 18:12 ` Sebastian Hesselbarth
0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Sebastian Hesselbarth @ 2014-03-23 18:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jean-Francois Moine
Cc: Russell King - ARM Linux, devicetree-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA,
linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r,
dri-devel-PD4FTy7X32lNgt0PjOBp9y5qC8QIuHrW,
linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA
On 03/23/2014 11:19 AM, Jean-Francois Moine wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Mar 2014 14:37:52 +0100
> Sebastian Hesselbarth <sebastian.hesselbarth-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>>> Required properties;
>>> - - compatible: must be "nxp,tda998x"
>>> + - compatible: may be "nxp,tda9989", "nxp,tda19988" or "nxp,tda19989"
>>
>> There is a "DT is ABI" policy and although there is no mainline Linux
>> user of current compatible, the correct way would be to deprecate
>> "nxp,tda998x" and introduce new compatibles.
>
> Pratically, what is this way?
Currently, there is no effective way to deprecate a binding or
compatible. You just add the one(s) that are more sensible and
you mark the old one as DEPRECATED by simply writing it in the
binding doc.
The driver should support the old binding at least for a while.
Sebastian
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2] drm/i2c: tda998x: Change the compatible strings
2014-03-23 18:12 ` Sebastian Hesselbarth
(?)
@ 2014-03-23 20:03 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Russell King - ARM Linux @ 2014-03-23 20:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Sebastian Hesselbarth
Cc: Jean-Francois Moine, devicetree, linux-arm-kernel, dri-devel,
linux-kernel
On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 07:12:05PM +0100, Sebastian Hesselbarth wrote:
> On 03/23/2014 11:19 AM, Jean-Francois Moine wrote:
>> On Fri, 21 Mar 2014 14:37:52 +0100
>> Sebastian Hesselbarth <sebastian.hesselbarth@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Required properties;
>>>> - - compatible: must be "nxp,tda998x"
>>>> + - compatible: may be "nxp,tda9989", "nxp,tda19988" or "nxp,tda19989"
>>>
>>> There is a "DT is ABI" policy and although there is no mainline Linux
>>> user of current compatible, the correct way would be to deprecate
>>> "nxp,tda998x" and introduce new compatibles.
>>
>> Pratically, what is this way?
>
> Currently, there is no effective way to deprecate a binding or
> compatible. You just add the one(s) that are more sensible and
> you mark the old one as DEPRECATED by simply writing it in the
> binding doc.
>
> The driver should support the old binding at least for a while.
It doesn't need to - it's only been in development trees so far, and
never been in a mainline full release. Until it does, the binding
does not become stable.
--
FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line: now at 9.7Mbps down 460kbps up... slowly
improving, and getting towards what was expected from it.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v2] drm/i2c: tda998x: Change the compatible strings
@ 2014-03-23 20:03 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Russell King - ARM Linux @ 2014-03-23 20:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 07:12:05PM +0100, Sebastian Hesselbarth wrote:
> On 03/23/2014 11:19 AM, Jean-Francois Moine wrote:
>> On Fri, 21 Mar 2014 14:37:52 +0100
>> Sebastian Hesselbarth <sebastian.hesselbarth@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Required properties;
>>>> - - compatible: must be "nxp,tda998x"
>>>> + - compatible: may be "nxp,tda9989", "nxp,tda19988" or "nxp,tda19989"
>>>
>>> There is a "DT is ABI" policy and although there is no mainline Linux
>>> user of current compatible, the correct way would be to deprecate
>>> "nxp,tda998x" and introduce new compatibles.
>>
>> Pratically, what is this way?
>
> Currently, there is no effective way to deprecate a binding or
> compatible. You just add the one(s) that are more sensible and
> you mark the old one as DEPRECATED by simply writing it in the
> binding doc.
>
> The driver should support the old binding at least for a while.
It doesn't need to - it's only been in development trees so far, and
never been in a mainline full release. Until it does, the binding
does not become stable.
--
FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line: now at 9.7Mbps down 460kbps up... slowly
improving, and getting towards what was expected from it.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2] drm/i2c: tda998x: Change the compatible strings
@ 2014-03-23 20:03 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Russell King - ARM Linux @ 2014-03-23 20:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Sebastian Hesselbarth
Cc: linux-kernel, dri-devel, linux-arm-kernel, devicetree
On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 07:12:05PM +0100, Sebastian Hesselbarth wrote:
> On 03/23/2014 11:19 AM, Jean-Francois Moine wrote:
>> On Fri, 21 Mar 2014 14:37:52 +0100
>> Sebastian Hesselbarth <sebastian.hesselbarth@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Required properties;
>>>> - - compatible: must be "nxp,tda998x"
>>>> + - compatible: may be "nxp,tda9989", "nxp,tda19988" or "nxp,tda19989"
>>>
>>> There is a "DT is ABI" policy and although there is no mainline Linux
>>> user of current compatible, the correct way would be to deprecate
>>> "nxp,tda998x" and introduce new compatibles.
>>
>> Pratically, what is this way?
>
> Currently, there is no effective way to deprecate a binding or
> compatible. You just add the one(s) that are more sensible and
> you mark the old one as DEPRECATED by simply writing it in the
> binding doc.
>
> The driver should support the old binding at least for a while.
It doesn't need to - it's only been in development trees so far, and
never been in a mainline full release. Until it does, the binding
does not become stable.
--
FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line: now at 9.7Mbps down 460kbps up... slowly
improving, and getting towards what was expected from it.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2] drm/i2c: tda998x: Change the compatible strings
@ 2014-03-23 22:44 ` Sebastian Hesselbarth
0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Sebastian Hesselbarth @ 2014-03-23 22:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Russell King - ARM Linux
Cc: Jean-Francois Moine, devicetree, linux-arm-kernel, dri-devel,
linux-kernel
On 03/23/2014 09:03 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 07:12:05PM +0100, Sebastian Hesselbarth wrote:
>> On 03/23/2014 11:19 AM, Jean-Francois Moine wrote:
>>> On Fri, 21 Mar 2014 14:37:52 +0100
>>> Sebastian Hesselbarth <sebastian.hesselbarth@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Required properties;
>>>>> - - compatible: must be "nxp,tda998x"
>>>>> + - compatible: may be "nxp,tda9989", "nxp,tda19988" or "nxp,tda19989"
>>>>
>>>> There is a "DT is ABI" policy and although there is no mainline Linux
>>>> user of current compatible, the correct way would be to deprecate
>>>> "nxp,tda998x" and introduce new compatibles.
>>>
>>> Pratically, what is this way?
>>
>> Currently, there is no effective way to deprecate a binding or
>> compatible. You just add the one(s) that are more sensible and
>> you mark the old one as DEPRECATED by simply writing it in the
>> binding doc.
>>
>> The driver should support the old binding at least for a while.
>
> It doesn't need to - it's only been in development trees so far, and
> never been in a mainline full release. Until it does, the binding
> does not become stable.
Ok, I see. Thanks for the clarification. A note about it would
have been nice though. Anyway, sorry for the noise.
Sebastian
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v2] drm/i2c: tda998x: Change the compatible strings
@ 2014-03-23 22:44 ` Sebastian Hesselbarth
0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Sebastian Hesselbarth @ 2014-03-23 22:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
On 03/23/2014 09:03 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 07:12:05PM +0100, Sebastian Hesselbarth wrote:
>> On 03/23/2014 11:19 AM, Jean-Francois Moine wrote:
>>> On Fri, 21 Mar 2014 14:37:52 +0100
>>> Sebastian Hesselbarth <sebastian.hesselbarth@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Required properties;
>>>>> - - compatible: must be "nxp,tda998x"
>>>>> + - compatible: may be "nxp,tda9989", "nxp,tda19988" or "nxp,tda19989"
>>>>
>>>> There is a "DT is ABI" policy and although there is no mainline Linux
>>>> user of current compatible, the correct way would be to deprecate
>>>> "nxp,tda998x" and introduce new compatibles.
>>>
>>> Pratically, what is this way?
>>
>> Currently, there is no effective way to deprecate a binding or
>> compatible. You just add the one(s) that are more sensible and
>> you mark the old one as DEPRECATED by simply writing it in the
>> binding doc.
>>
>> The driver should support the old binding at least for a while.
>
> It doesn't need to - it's only been in development trees so far, and
> never been in a mainline full release. Until it does, the binding
> does not become stable.
Ok, I see. Thanks for the clarification. A note about it would
have been nice though. Anyway, sorry for the noise.
Sebastian
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2] drm/i2c: tda998x: Change the compatible strings
@ 2014-03-23 22:44 ` Sebastian Hesselbarth
0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Sebastian Hesselbarth @ 2014-03-23 22:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Russell King - ARM Linux
Cc: Jean-Francois Moine, devicetree-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA,
linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r,
dri-devel-PD4FTy7X32lNgt0PjOBp9y5qC8QIuHrW,
linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA
On 03/23/2014 09:03 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 07:12:05PM +0100, Sebastian Hesselbarth wrote:
>> On 03/23/2014 11:19 AM, Jean-Francois Moine wrote:
>>> On Fri, 21 Mar 2014 14:37:52 +0100
>>> Sebastian Hesselbarth <sebastian.hesselbarth-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>>>>> Required properties;
>>>>> - - compatible: must be "nxp,tda998x"
>>>>> + - compatible: may be "nxp,tda9989", "nxp,tda19988" or "nxp,tda19989"
>>>>
>>>> There is a "DT is ABI" policy and although there is no mainline Linux
>>>> user of current compatible, the correct way would be to deprecate
>>>> "nxp,tda998x" and introduce new compatibles.
>>>
>>> Pratically, what is this way?
>>
>> Currently, there is no effective way to deprecate a binding or
>> compatible. You just add the one(s) that are more sensible and
>> you mark the old one as DEPRECATED by simply writing it in the
>> binding doc.
>>
>> The driver should support the old binding at least for a while.
>
> It doesn't need to - it's only been in development trees so far, and
> never been in a mainline full release. Until it does, the binding
> does not become stable.
Ok, I see. Thanks for the clarification. A note about it would
have been nice though. Anyway, sorry for the noise.
Sebastian
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread