From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751845AbdDCXDg (ORCPT ); Mon, 3 Apr 2017 19:03:36 -0400 Received: from emh06.mail.saunalahti.fi ([62.142.5.116]:40089 "EHLO emh06.mail.saunalahti.fi" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751535AbdDCXDf (ORCPT ); Mon, 3 Apr 2017 19:03:35 -0400 X-Greylist: delayed 588 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Mon, 03 Apr 2017 19:03:34 EDT Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2017 01:53:42 +0300 From: Aaro Koskinen To: Javier Martinez Canillas Cc: Rob Herring , Lee Jones , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, Tony Lindgren , Linux-OMAP Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/7] mfd: retu: Add OF device ID table Message-ID: <20170403225342.eqyh3van4q6bxpuv@raspberrypi-3.musicnaut.iki.fi> References: <20170401071854.23198-1-javier@osg.samsung.com> <20170401071854.23198-3-javier@osg.samsung.com> <20170403111502.lotjpd746vkhekkg@dell> <2147b8c9-02ee-1b9c-a74e-119b0b73d1d7@osg.samsung.com> <20170403222010.xgbf7imyieyfroqr@rob-hp-laptop> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi, On Mon, Apr 03, 2017 at 06:24:39PM -0400, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote: > On 04/03/2017 06:20 PM, Rob Herring wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 03, 2017 at 11:45:14AM -0400, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote: > >> Hello Lee, > >> > >> On 04/03/2017 07:15 AM, Lee Jones wrote: > >> > >> [snip] > >> > >>>> > >>>> +static const struct of_device_id retu_of_match[] = { > >>>> + { .compatible = "nokia,retu-mfd" }, > >>>> + { .compatible = "nokia,tahvo-mfd" }, > >>> > >>> Please drop the "-mfd". > >>> > >> > >> Yes, I also didn't like it but I didn't want to change it since that would > >> mean that backward compatiblity and bisect-ability will be broken by this > >> change. > >> > >> In other words, just adding a vendor prefix won't cause an issue if patches > >> are merged independently since if DTS patches are merged before, the driver > >> will still lookup using the I2C device ID table. And if the drivers patches > >> are picked before, the DTS will match using the OF device ID table. > >> > >> But changing to "nokia,retu" and "nokia,tahvo" means that you will need to > >> pick all patches and also that the DTS and drivers changes will have to be > >> done in the same patch. If you are OK with that, then I can change in the > >> next version. > > > > tahvo is not documented nor used in any dts (in the kernel at least). True, there are no known DT users of Tahvo. > > retu is used by 1 board and happened to work, but was never documented. > > So I think it is okay to change unless the N800 folks object. > > I'm fine with changing it (in fact I just want to fix the I2C of modalias > reporting). Does this mean that backward compatibility and bisect-ability > should be preserved? Or it's OK to split the changes in different patches? There are 2 boards actually, N800 and N810. Retu is critical, because if retu-mfd/watchdog fails to probe the device will power off soon after boot. So for bisect-ability you should make changes in a single patch. A.