Re: [PATCH 09/20] dt-bindings: pinctrl: ralink: {mt7620,mt7621}: rename to mediatek

From: "Arınç ÜNAL" <arinc.unal@arinc9.com>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>,
	Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>
Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org>,
	linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org, linux-mips@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Sergio Paracuellos <sergio.paracuellos@gmail.com>,
	Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@gmail.com>,
	Sean Wang <sean.wang@kernel.org>,
	William Dean <williamsukatube@gmail.com>,
	Daniel Golle <daniel@makrotopia.org>,
	Daniel Santos <daniel.santos@pobox.com>,
	Luiz Angelo Daros de Luca <luizluca@gmail.com>,
	Frank Wunderlich <frank-w@public-files.de>,
	Landen Chao <Landen.Chao@mediatek.com>,
	DENG Qingfang <dqfext@gmail.com>,
	Sean Wang <sean.wang@mediatek.com>,
	erkin.bozoglu@xeront.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/20] dt-bindings: pinctrl: ralink: {mt7620,mt7621}: rename to mediatek
Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2023 13:34:18 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <deca532a-bdf5-c49e-1422-ce6124b61882@arinc9.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <9663817e-7f6f-c3b1-8bf9-321f9b067e96@linaro.org>

On 9.03.2023 12:52, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 09/03/2023 08:53, Arınç ÜNAL wrote:
>> On 9.03.2023 00:19, Arınç ÜNAL wrote:
>>> On 9.03.2023 00:05, Rob Herring wrote:
>>>> On Fri, Mar 03, 2023 at 03:28:38AM +0300, arinc9.unal@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>> From: Arınç ÜNAL <arinc.unal@arinc9.com>
>>>>>
>>>>> This platform from Ralink was acquired by MediaTek in 2011. Then,
>>>>> MediaTek
>>>>> introduced these SoCs which utilise this platform. Rename the schemas to
>>>>> mediatek to address the incorrect naming.
>>>>
>>>> I said we don't do renames due to acquistions, you said that wasn't the
>>>> reason, but then that's your reasoning here.
>>>
>>> It's not a marketing/acquistion rename as the name of these SoCs were
>>> wrong from the get go. The information on the first sentence is to give
>>> the idea of why these SoCs were wrongfully named as the base platform
>>> that these new MediaTek SoCs share code with was called Ralink.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> To give you another example, *new* i.MX things are still called
>>>> 'fsl,imx...' and it has been how many years since merging with NXP?
>>>
>>> Ok this is a point I see now. Though, I fail to see how this is called
>>> renaming when there's only new SoCs (from NXP in this case) to be added.
>>
>> If I understand correctly, i.MX is a family from Freescale so the name
> 
> It's the same "family" as your platform, because as you said:
> "introduced these SoCs which utilise this platform"
> 
>> was kept the same on new SoC releases from NXP. I believe it's different
>> in this case here. There's no family name. The closest thing on the name
>> of the SoC model is, it's RT for Ralink, MT for MediaTek.
> 
> It's not about the name. NXP took Freescale platform and since many
> years makes entirely new products, currently far, far away from original
> platform.
> 
> That's the same case you have here - Mediatek took existing platform and
> started making new products with it.
> 
>>
>> On top of that, mediatek strings already exist for MT SoCs already, at
>> least for MT7621.
>>
>> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/netdev/net-next.git/tree/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mips/ralink.yaml?id=dd3cb467ebb5659d6552999d6f16a616653f9933#n83
> 
> NXP also has compatibles with nxp, thus still not that good reason.

Ok, makes sense. Am I free to call the SoCs MediaTek, change the schema 
name from ralink,mtXXXX-pinctrl.yaml to mediatek,mtXXXX-pinctrl.yaml 
whilst keeping the compatible string ralink?

I plan to do some cleanup on ralink.yaml as well. From what I 
understand, I should change the mediatek,mt7621-soc compatible string to 
ralink,mt7621-soc?

Arınç