[PATCH] spi: tegra: sequence compatible strings as per preference

[PATCH] spi: tegra: sequence compatible strings as per preference

[Laxman Dewangan]

Sequence compatible list for tegra20-slink driver to first
look for Tegra30 and then Tegra20. Tegra30 have additional
feature in HW which need to be utilize if it is provided from DT.

Signed-off-by: Laxman Dewangan <ldewangan@nvidia.com>
---
 drivers/spi/spi-tegra20-slink.c |    2 +-
 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/spi/spi-tegra20-slink.c b/drivers/spi/spi-tegra20-slink.c
index 07dc735..7882b50 100644
--- a/drivers/spi/spi-tegra20-slink.c
+++ b/drivers/spi/spi-tegra20-slink.c
@@ -1109,8 +1109,8 @@ const struct tegra_slink_chip_data tegra20_spi_cdata = {
 };
 
 static struct of_device_id tegra_slink_of_match[] __devinitconst = {
-	{ .compatible = "nvidia,tegra20-slink", .data = &tegra20_spi_cdata, },
 	{ .compatible = "nvidia,tegra30-slink", .data = &tegra30_spi_cdata, },
+	{ .compatible = "nvidia,tegra20-slink", .data = &tegra20_spi_cdata, },
 	{}
 };
 MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, tegra_slink_of_match);
-- 
1.7.1.1

Re: [PATCH] spi: tegra: sequence compatible strings as per preference

[Mark Brown]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 273 bytes --]

On Fri, Nov 09, 2012 at 02:37:32PM +0530, Laxman Dewangan wrote:
> Sequence compatible list for tegra20-slink driver to first
> look for Tegra30 and then Tegra20. Tegra30 have additional
> feature in HW which need to be utilize if it is provided from DT.

Applied, thanks.

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH] spi: tegra: sequence compatible strings as per preference

[Stephen Warren]

On 11/09/2012 02:07 AM, Laxman Dewangan wrote:
> Sequence compatible list for tegra20-slink driver to first
> look for Tegra30 and then Tegra20. Tegra30 have additional
> feature in HW which need to be utilize if it is provided from DT.

I don't object to this patch.

However just FYI, it should not be necessary for correctness; The DT
matching order is supposed to be driven purely by the order of the
compatible values in the DT now, and not affected by the order of values
in the table. (This wasn't always the case, but was a bug that was fixed
IIRC by Thierry Reding).

Re: [PATCH] spi: tegra: sequence compatible strings as per preference

[Mark Brown]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 471 bytes --]

On Fri, Nov 09, 2012 at 10:04:56AM -0700, Stephen Warren wrote:

> However just FYI, it should not be necessary for correctness; The DT
> matching order is supposed to be driven purely by the order of the
> compatible values in the DT now, and not affected by the order of values
> in the table. (This wasn't always the case, but was a bug that was fixed
> IIRC by Thierry Reding).

I guess the driver is being used backported in older kernels which don't
have that fix?

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH] spi: tegra: sequence compatible strings as per preference

[Stephen Warren]

On 11/09/2012 10:10 AM, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 09, 2012 at 10:04:56AM -0700, Stephen Warren wrote:
> 
>> However just FYI, it should not be necessary for correctness; The
>> DT matching order is supposed to be driven purely by the order of
>> the compatible values in the DT now, and not affected by the
>> order of values in the table. (This wasn't always the case, but
>> was a bug that was fixed IIRC by Thierry Reding).
> 
> I guess the driver is being used backported in older kernels which
> don't have that fix?

That sounds likely. Laxman, it'd be a good idea to track down the fix
to the DT matching code and backport it, so that hard-to debug issues
aren't caused by the lack of that patch!

Re: [PATCH] spi: tegra: sequence compatible strings as per preference

[Thierry Reding]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1157 bytes --]

On Fri, Nov 09, 2012 at 10:28:38AM -0700, Stephen Warren wrote:
> On 11/09/2012 10:10 AM, Mark Brown wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 09, 2012 at 10:04:56AM -0700, Stephen Warren wrote:
> > 
> >> However just FYI, it should not be necessary for correctness; The
> >> DT matching order is supposed to be driven purely by the order of
> >> the compatible values in the DT now, and not affected by the
> >> order of values in the table. (This wasn't always the case, but
> >> was a bug that was fixed IIRC by Thierry Reding).
> > 
> > I guess the driver is being used backported in older kernels which
> > don't have that fix?
> 
> That sounds likely. Laxman, it'd be a good idea to track down the fix
> to the DT matching code and backport it, so that hard-to debug issues
> aren't caused by the lack of that patch!

Unfortunately the patch that was supposed to fixed this caused a
regression and was therefore reverted. Rob (Cc'ed) said there was a
patch to fix it properly and was supposed to go into 3.6 but it seems
that never happened. Rob, what's the status on this?

The revert is here: bc51b0c22cebf5c311a6f1895fcca9f78efd0478

Thierry

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH] spi: tegra: sequence compatible strings as per preference

[Grant Likely]

On Sat, 10 Nov 2012 18:07:42 +0100, Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@avionic-design.de> wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 09, 2012 at 10:28:38AM -0700, Stephen Warren wrote:
> > On 11/09/2012 10:10 AM, Mark Brown wrote:
> > > On Fri, Nov 09, 2012 at 10:04:56AM -0700, Stephen Warren wrote:
> > > 
> > >> However just FYI, it should not be necessary for correctness; The
> > >> DT matching order is supposed to be driven purely by the order of
> > >> the compatible values in the DT now, and not affected by the
> > >> order of values in the table. (This wasn't always the case, but
> > >> was a bug that was fixed IIRC by Thierry Reding).
> > > 
> > > I guess the driver is being used backported in older kernels which
> > > don't have that fix?
> > 
> > That sounds likely. Laxman, it'd be a good idea to track down the fix
> > to the DT matching code and backport it, so that hard-to debug issues
> > aren't caused by the lack of that patch!
> 
> Unfortunately the patch that was supposed to fixed this caused a
> regression and was therefore reverted. Rob (Cc'ed) said there was a
> patch to fix it properly and was supposed to go into 3.6 but it seems
> that never happened. Rob, what's the status on this?
> 
> The revert is here: bc51b0c22cebf5c311a6f1895fcca9f78efd0478

Rob, ping on this. I think we talked about it on IRC, but I cannot
remember what was said.... I must be getting old.

g.

Re: [PATCH] spi: tegra: sequence compatible strings as per preference

[Thierry Reding]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1560 bytes --]

On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 05:00:09PM +0000, Grant Likely wrote:
> On Sat, 10 Nov 2012 18:07:42 +0100, Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@avionic-design.de> wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 09, 2012 at 10:28:38AM -0700, Stephen Warren wrote:
> > > On 11/09/2012 10:10 AM, Mark Brown wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Nov 09, 2012 at 10:04:56AM -0700, Stephen Warren wrote:
> > > > 
> > > >> However just FYI, it should not be necessary for correctness; The
> > > >> DT matching order is supposed to be driven purely by the order of
> > > >> the compatible values in the DT now, and not affected by the
> > > >> order of values in the table. (This wasn't always the case, but
> > > >> was a bug that was fixed IIRC by Thierry Reding).
> > > > 
> > > > I guess the driver is being used backported in older kernels which
> > > > don't have that fix?
> > > 
> > > That sounds likely. Laxman, it'd be a good idea to track down the fix
> > > to the DT matching code and backport it, so that hard-to debug issues
> > > aren't caused by the lack of that patch!
> > 
> > Unfortunately the patch that was supposed to fixed this caused a
> > regression and was therefore reverted. Rob (Cc'ed) said there was a
> > patch to fix it properly and was supposed to go into 3.6 but it seems
> > that never happened. Rob, what's the status on this?
> > 
> > The revert is here: bc51b0c22cebf5c311a6f1895fcca9f78efd0478
> 
> Rob, ping on this. I think we talked about it on IRC, but I cannot
> remember what was said.... I must be getting old.

Any news on this one?

Thierry

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]