Re: [PATCH v6 04/12] misc: at25: Make use of device property API

["Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>]

On Tuesday, November 04, 2014 03:04:54 PM Grant Likely wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 4, 2014 at 2:38 PM, Mika Westerberg
> <mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 04, 2014 at 02:18:26PM +0000, Grant Likely wrote:
> >> > -   strncpy(chip->name, np->name, sizeof(chip->name));
> >> > +   strncpy(chip->name, "at25", sizeof(chip->name));
> >>
> >> This line changes behaviour of the driver. It's possibly not a problem,
> >> but it should be commented on and whether any due diligance has been
> >> done to make sure it there isn't anything that depends on it.
> >
> > I found only one user for "atmel,at25" in any of the DT sample files.
> >
> > arch/arm/boot/dts/phy3250.dts:
> >
> >         eeprom: at25@0 {
> >                 ...
> >                 at25,byte-len = <0x8000>;
> >                 at25,addr-mode = <2>;
> >                 at25,page-size = <64>;
> >
> >                 compatible = "atmel,at25";
> >                 reg = <0>;
> >                 spi-max-frequency = <5000000>;
> >         };
> >
> > I think np->name is "at25" in this case? The binding file
> > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/misc/at25.txt also has the same name.
> >
> > Are you OK, if we add something like below to the changelog?
> >
> >  In addition we hard-code the name of the chip to be "at25" for the
> >  reason that there is no common mechanism to fetch name of the firmware
> >  node. The only existing user (arch/arm/boot/dts/phy3250.dts) uses the
> >  same name so it should continue to work.
> 
> Yes. If somebody complains, then we can reinstate the previous
> behaviour, but assume it isn't necessary for now.

OK, done in my tree.  I've added the ACK too, but that still is in my
bleeding-edge branch for now until it gets build tested and I can
pull http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=141505792126265&w=4 from
somewhere. :-)

Rafael