From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Geert Uytterhoeven Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 2/2] dt-bindings: spi: Document Renesas R-Car Gen3 RPC-IF controller bindings Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2019 10:06:56 +0100 Message-ID: References: <1548227352-14910-1-git-send-email-masonccyang@mxic.com.tw> <1548227352-14910-3-git-send-email-masonccyang@mxic.com.tw> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Cc: Marek Vasut , Boris Brezillon , Mark Brown , Geert Uytterhoeven , Simon Horman , juliensu@mxic.com.tw, Linux Kernel Mailing List , Linux-Renesas , linux-spi , Sergei Shtylyov , zhengxunli@mxic.com.tw To: Mason Yang Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-spi.vger.kernel.org Hi Mason, On Thu, Jan 24, 2019 at 3:39 AM wrote: > > "Marek Vasut" > > 2019/01/24 上午 09:54 > > > > > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/spi-renesas- > > rpc.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/spi-renesas-rpc.txt > > > new file mode 100644 > > > index 0000000..305bd10 > > > --- /dev/null > > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/spi-renesas-rpc.txt > > > @@ -0,0 +1,46 @@ > > > +Renesas R-Car Gen3 RPC-IF controller Device Tree Bindings > > > +-------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > + > > > +Required properties: > > > +- compatible: should be an SoC-specific compatible value, followed by > > > + "renesas,rcar-gen3-rpc" as a fallback, i.e., > > > + "renesas,r8a77995-rpc", "renesas,rcar-gen3-rpc". > > > + "renesas,r8a7795-rpc" (R-Car H3) > > > + "renesas,r8a7796-rpc" (R-Car M3-W) > > > + "renesas,r8a77965-rpc" (R-Car M3-N) > > > + "renesas,r8a77970-rpc" (R-Car V3M) > > > + "renesas,r8a77980-rpc" (R-Car V3H) > > > + "renesas,r8a77990-rpc" (R-Car E3) > > > + "renesas,r8a77995-rpc" (R-Car D3) > > > > Was it tested on all of those SoCs and do we already handle all the > > quirks of those ? > > These are R-Car Gen3 series and I list these by Geert's comments, > or I misunderstand Geert's comments ? I think you misunderstood. Typically we only list the SoC-specific compatible values for SoCs that have been tested with the driver. So for now I'd go with: - compatible: should be an SoC-specific compatible value, followed by "renesas,rcar-gen3-rpc" as a fallback. Supported SoC-specific values are: - "renesas,r8a77995-rpc" (R-Car D3) The list can be extended when the driver has been tested/enhanced to support more SoC types. Does that sound OK? Thanks! Gr{oetje,eeting}s, Geert -- Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that. -- Linus Torvalds