From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: jason@lakedaemon.net (Jason Cooper)
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2013 11:57:00 -0400
Subject: [PATCH 1/3] i2c-mv64xxx: Add I2C Transaction Generator support
In-Reply-To: <20130807143546.GD2978@katana>
References: <1373898278-4805-1-git-send-email-gregory.clement@free-electrons.com>
 <1373898278-4805-2-git-send-email-gregory.clement@free-electrons.com>
 <20130716080503.GA3125@lukather>
 <5200E684.5080003@free-electrons.com>
 <20130807143546.GD2978@katana>
Message-ID: <20130807155700.GE19280@titan.lakedaemon.net>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

On Wed, Aug 07, 2013 at 04:35:46PM +0200, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> 
> > But we shouldn't use it alone: we should always use:
> > compatible = "marvell,mv78230-i2c", "marvell,mv64xxx-i2c";
> > 
> > From my point of view using  "marvell,mv78230-i2c" alone is an error.
> > 
> > Wolfram what is your opinion on it?
> 
> It is not strictly an error, but risky. If you use an older Kernel
> version (or other OS) which only offers "mv64xxx" you will have no
> match. Although the driver theoretically could have basic support for
> all mv64xxx variants skipping all additional features of later IP
> revisions.

I agree here.  The driver is advertising what IP blocks it can handle,
so it makes sense to add both strings since it can handle both.

thx,

Jason.