From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: sebastian.hesselbarth@gmail.com (Sebastian Hesselbarth) Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2014 23:44:55 +0100 Subject: [PATCH v2] drm/i2c: tda998x: Change the compatible strings In-Reply-To: <20140323200334.GP7528@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> References: <20140321115541.01cbbb06@armhf> <532C40B0.3000805@gmail.com> <20140323111903.51c73c82@armhf> <532F23F5.6020001@gmail.com> <20140323200334.GP7528@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> Message-ID: <532F63E7.8000708@gmail.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 03/23/2014 09:03 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 07:12:05PM +0100, Sebastian Hesselbarth wrote: >> On 03/23/2014 11:19 AM, Jean-Francois Moine wrote: >>> On Fri, 21 Mar 2014 14:37:52 +0100 >>> Sebastian Hesselbarth wrote: >>>>> Required properties; >>>>> - - compatible: must be "nxp,tda998x" >>>>> + - compatible: may be "nxp,tda9989", "nxp,tda19988" or "nxp,tda19989" >>>> >>>> There is a "DT is ABI" policy and although there is no mainline Linux >>>> user of current compatible, the correct way would be to deprecate >>>> "nxp,tda998x" and introduce new compatibles. >>> >>> Pratically, what is this way? >> >> Currently, there is no effective way to deprecate a binding or >> compatible. You just add the one(s) that are more sensible and >> you mark the old one as DEPRECATED by simply writing it in the >> binding doc. >> >> The driver should support the old binding at least for a while. > > It doesn't need to - it's only been in development trees so far, and > never been in a mainline full release. Until it does, the binding > does not become stable. Ok, I see. Thanks for the clarification. A note about it would have been nice though. Anyway, sorry for the noise. Sebastian