On Tue, 9 Jul 2013 16:10:53 +0800, Huang Shijie <b32955@freescale.com> wrote:
> 于 2013年07月09日 15:51, Sascha Hauer 写道:
> > On Tue, Jul 09, 2013 at 03:46:34PM +0800, Huang Shijie wrote:
> >> 于 2013年07月09日 15:05, Sascha Hauer 写道:
> >>> Why don't you set the matching order in the driver the way you want it
> >>> to be, i.e.:
> >>>
> >>> 	{ .compatible = "fsl,imx6q-uart", ... },
> >>> 	{ .compatible = "fsl,imx21-uart", ... },
> >>> 	{ .compatible = "fsl,imx1-uart", ... },
> >>>
> >> yes. i can set it like this.
> >>
> >> but this method looks like a ugly workaround.
> > If a driver has different ways of supporting a single device, then
> > putting the preferred or most feature rich on top doesn't look very ugly
> > to me.
> this method makes it much _coupled_ between the driver and the dts file.
> 
> IMHO, it's an unnecessary _burden_ to the driver programmer:
>     he should puts the most feature compatible on the top.
> 
> it's much graceful if we let the driver programmer be transparent about 
> this.

Absolutely true. Applied, thanks.

g.