From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Message-id: <5630A3E2.9010207@samsung.com> Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2015 16:00:58 +0530 From: Alim Akhtar MIME-version: 1.0 To: Alexandre Belloni , Krzysztof Kozlowski Cc: Mark Brown , lee.jones@linaro.org, mturquette@baylibre.com, linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org, linux-clk@vger.kernel.org, rtc-linux@googlegroups.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [rtc-linux] Re: [PATCH v3 5/5] drivers/rtc/rtc-s5m.c: add support for S2MPS15 RTC References: <1445863883-5187-1-git-send-email-alim.akhtar@samsung.com> <1445863883-5187-6-git-send-email-alim.akhtar@samsung.com> <56302514.4090407@samsung.com> <20151028015323.GZ28319@sirena.org.uk> <56303054.8060804@samsung.com> <56303DA3.5020306@samsung.com> <5630419F.1000300@samsung.com> <20151028094853.GM22331@piout.net> In-reply-to: <20151028094853.GM22331@piout.net> Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed List-ID: Hi Alexandre, On 10/28/2015 03:18 PM, Alexandre Belloni wrote: > On 28/10/2015 at 12:31:43 +0900, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote : >> The s2mps13 clock driver added new name and compatible... which was >> probably totally unneeded (I missed that during review). We don't have >> to make this as a rule... >> >> Since we do not have any data about future workarounds and the >> differences then just follow Ockham's razor - use the same name and >> compatible. >> > > So you don't care about DT backward compatibility because when a > workaround will be needed for one of the IPs, then you will have to > update the old dtb to use it. > > Unless you are sure that the IP is the same, doing > > { "s2mps15-rtc", S2MPS14X }, > > is probably the best way to handle that. Note that I personally don't > care about the DT ABI, I'm just pointing out what may happen ;) > Thats what my point is, anyway I am still looking into the fine prints of the s2mps15 and s2mps14 user manual, now I have found at least one difference in their one of the register bit, which might be a good reason to keep s2mps15-rtc device. Will update the same in v4. Thanks, From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mailout1.samsung.com (mailout1.samsung.com. [203.254.224.24]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id vy6si4704529pbc.1.2015.10.28.03.39.53 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 28 Oct 2015 03:39:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from epcpsbgr4.samsung.com (u144.gpu120.samsung.co.kr [203.254.230.144]) by mailout1.samsung.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 7.0.5.31.0 64bit (built May 5 2014)) with ESMTP id <0NWX01UTTEYFPH90@mailout1.samsung.com> for rtc-linux@googlegroups.com; Wed, 28 Oct 2015 19:39:51 +0900 (KST) Message-id: <5630A3E2.9010207@samsung.com> Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2015 16:00:58 +0530 From: Alim Akhtar MIME-version: 1.0 To: Alexandre Belloni , Krzysztof Kozlowski Cc: Mark Brown , lee.jones@linaro.org, mturquette@baylibre.com, linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org, linux-clk@vger.kernel.org, rtc-linux@googlegroups.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [rtc-linux] Re: [PATCH v3 5/5] drivers/rtc/rtc-s5m.c: add support for S2MPS15 RTC References: <1445863883-5187-1-git-send-email-alim.akhtar@samsung.com> <1445863883-5187-6-git-send-email-alim.akhtar@samsung.com> <56302514.4090407@samsung.com> <20151028015323.GZ28319@sirena.org.uk> <56303054.8060804@samsung.com> <56303DA3.5020306@samsung.com> <5630419F.1000300@samsung.com> <20151028094853.GM22331@piout.net> In-reply-to: <20151028094853.GM22331@piout.net> Content-type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Reply-To: rtc-linux@googlegroups.com List-ID: List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: , List-Unsubscribe: , Hi Alexandre, On 10/28/2015 03:18 PM, Alexandre Belloni wrote: > On 28/10/2015 at 12:31:43 +0900, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote : >> The s2mps13 clock driver added new name and compatible... which was >> probably totally unneeded (I missed that during review). We don't have >> to make this as a rule... >> >> Since we do not have any data about future workarounds and the >> differences then just follow Ockham's razor - use the same name and >> compatible. >> > > So you don't care about DT backward compatibility because when a > workaround will be needed for one of the IPs, then you will have to > update the old dtb to use it. > > Unless you are sure that the IP is the same, doing > > { "s2mps15-rtc", S2MPS14X }, > > is probably the best way to handle that. Note that I personally don't > care about the DT ABI, I'm just pointing out what may happen ;) > Thats what my point is, anyway I am still looking into the fine prints of the s2mps15 and s2mps14 user manual, now I have found at least one difference in their one of the register bit, which might be a good reason to keep s2mps15-rtc device. Will update the same in v4. Thanks, -- -- You received this message because you are subscribed to "rtc-linux". Membership options at http://groups.google.com/group/rtc-linux . Please read http://groups.google.com/group/rtc-linux/web/checklist before submitting a driver. --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "rtc-linux" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rtc-linux+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.