Re: [PATCH 5/5] staging: mt7621-pci: parse some dt properties from root port child nodes

[Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>]

On Mon, Jun 07, 2021 at 01:10:57PM +0200, Sergio Paracuellos wrote:
> Hi Dan,
> 
> On Mon, Jun 7, 2021 at 12:37 PM Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Jun 07, 2021 at 09:11:13AM +0200, Sergio Paracuellos wrote:
> > > Hi Dan,
> > >
> > > On Mon, Jun 7, 2021 at 8:59 AM Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Sat, Jun 05, 2021 at 09:30:23AM +0200, Sergio Paracuellos wrote:
> > > > > Properties 'clocks', 'resets' and 'phys' have been moved from parent
> > > > > node to the root port childs. Hence we have to adapt the way device
> > > > > tree is parsed in driver code to properly align things and make all
> > > > > the stuff work.
> > > > >
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Sergio Paracuellos <sergio.paracuellos@gmail.com>
> > > >
> > > > It sounds like this commit needs a fixes tag?  What does "to properly
> > > > align things and make all the stuff work." in terms of what the user
> > > > sees?
> > >
> > > I submitted this driver to get mainlined and when bindings have been
> > > reviewed I've been told to move this stuff into child nodes. Until now
> > > all was also being properly working but with these properties defined
> > > in the parent node. So I don't think any Fixes tag is needed here. So
> > > hopefully changes on this patchset are the last need to get this
> > > properly mainlined. I've been told to just make a 'git mv' without
> > > zero changes from the staging driver, that's why I am submitting
> > > changes to staging before.
> >
> > I'm really trying to understand how this affects the user experience but
> > it sounds like you don't know either but you were told it was the
> > correct thing and it seems to work?
> 
> What do you mean with "user experience" here? So to work with the
> future mainlined driver we need the dts file to be aligned with device
> tree parsing code. If we move these properties into child nodes
> (previous patch do this) and the code is properly aligned, for the
> user the change is transparent. This SoC is mostly used in openWRT
> where new versions compile new code and device tree completely so I
> don't expect any compatibility problems also because of these changes,
> AFAICT.
> 

Basically what I want from the commit message is that "I do not expect
most users to notice this change, but it is the correct thing to do".
The original commit message said "make all that stuff work" and it
wasn't clear which things were not working...

regards,
dan carpenter