From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Shawn Guo <shawnguo@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/8] can: flexcan: add CAN FD support for NXP Flexcan
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2020 17:33:51 +0800
Message-ID: <20200218093346.GC6075@dragon>
References: <24eb5c67-4692-1002-2468-4ae2e1a6b68b@pengutronix.de>
 <20200213192027.4813-1-michael@walle.cc>
 <DB7PR04MB461896B6CC3EDC7009BCD741E6150@DB7PR04MB4618.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com>
 <2322fb83486c678917957d9879e27e63@walle.cc>
 <DB7PR04MB46187A6B5A8EC3A1D73D69FFE6150@DB7PR04MB4618.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com>
 <bf671072ce479049eb354d44f3617383@walle.cc>
 <DB7PR04MB46183F74C137B644A229B632E6150@DB7PR04MB4618.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com>
 <78789949f2a9dc532ec461768fbd3a60@walle.cc>
 <20200217071349.GC7973@dragon>
 <0d02f6cee0d3a680f246e8fea40f6699@walle.cc>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Return-path: <netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <0d02f6cee0d3a680f246e8fea40f6699@walle.cc>
Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org
To: Michael Walle <michael@walle.cc>
Cc: Joakim Zhang <qiangqing.zhang@nxp.com>, Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@pengutronix.de>, wg@grandegger.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-can@vger.kernel.org, Pankaj Bansal <pankaj.bansal@nxp.com>
List-Id: linux-can.vger.kernel.org

On Mon, Feb 17, 2020 at 09:48:36AM +0100, Michael Walle wrote:
> > My opinion is that all compatibles should be defined explicitly in
> > bindings doc.  In above example, the possible values of <processor>
> > should be given.  This must be done anyway, as we are moving to
> > json-schema bindings.
> 
> But if they are listed in the document, they also have to be in the
> of_device_id table, correct?

I do not think so.  Documenting compatibles used in DTS now doesn't
necessarily mean we need to use it in kernel driver right away.
Bindings doc is a specification for device tree, not kernel.  With the
compatible in DTS and bindings, kernel can start using it at any time
when there is a need, like dealing with SoC quirks or bugs found later.

Shawn

> Which somehow contradicts the talk Pankaj
> mentioned [1,2]. Eg.
> 
>   compatible = "fsl,ls1028ar1-flexcan","fsl,lx2160ar1-flexcan";
> 
> Doesn't make any sense, because the "fsl,ls1028ar1-flexcan" is alreay
> in the driver and the fallback "fsl,lx2160ar1-flexcan" isn't needed.
> 
> OTOH the talk is already 2 to 3 years old and things might have changed
> since then.
> 
> -michael
> 
> [1] https://elinux.org/images/0/0e/OSELAS.Presentation-ELCE2017-DT.pdf
> [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6iguKSJJfxo