[PATCH] dt-bindings: qcom: readme: document preferred compatible naming

[PATCH] dt-bindings: qcom: readme: document preferred compatible naming

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

Compatibles can come in two formats.  Either "vendor,ip-soc" or
"vendor,soc-ip".  Qualcomm bindings were mixing both of usages, so add a
readme file documenting preferred policy.

Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>

---

Cc: Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@linaro.org>
Cc: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@linaro.org>
Cc: Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org>
Cc: Alex Elder <elder@linaro.org>
Cc: Robert Foss <robert.foss@linaro.org>
Cc: Bhupesh Sharma <bhupesh.sharma@linaro.org>
---
 .../devicetree/bindings/soc/qcom/README.rst      | 16 ++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/qcom/README.rst

diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/qcom/README.rst b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/qcom/README.rst
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..322b329ac7c1
--- /dev/null
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/qcom/README.rst
@@ -0,0 +1,16 @@
+.. SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause
+
+Qualcomm SoC compatibles naming convention
+==========================================
+1. When adding new compatibles in new bindings, use the format:
+   ::
+
+     qcom,SoC-IP
+
+   For example:
+   ::
+
+     qcom,sdm845-llcc-bwmon
+
+2. When adding new compatibles to existing bindings, use the format
+   in the existing binding, even if it contradicts the above.
-- 
2.34.1

Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: qcom: readme: document preferred compatible naming

[Rob Herring]

On Fri, Jul 01, 2022 at 09:46:59AM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> Compatibles can come in two formats.  Either "vendor,ip-soc" or
> "vendor,soc-ip".  Qualcomm bindings were mixing both of usages, so add a
> readme file documenting preferred policy.

Is this all I needed to do to stop this from QCom? </sarcasm>

This convention is not QCom specific, though the error mostly is. 
Perhaps this should be documented generically.

> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>
> 
> ---
> 
> Cc: Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@linaro.org>
> Cc: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@linaro.org>
> Cc: Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org>
> Cc: Alex Elder <elder@linaro.org>
> Cc: Robert Foss <robert.foss@linaro.org>
> Cc: Bhupesh Sharma <bhupesh.sharma@linaro.org>
> ---
>  .../devicetree/bindings/soc/qcom/README.rst      | 16 ++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 16 insertions(+)
>  create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/qcom/README.rst
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/qcom/README.rst b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/qcom/README.rst
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000000..322b329ac7c1
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/qcom/README.rst
> @@ -0,0 +1,16 @@
> +.. SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause
> +
> +Qualcomm SoC compatibles naming convention
> +==========================================
> +1. When adding new compatibles in new bindings, use the format:
> +   ::
> +
> +     qcom,SoC-IP
> +
> +   For example:
> +   ::
> +
> +     qcom,sdm845-llcc-bwmon

Assuming the list of possible SoCs was maintained, you could make this a 
schema. Though there might be false positives.

> +
> +2. When adding new compatibles to existing bindings, use the format
> +   in the existing binding, even if it contradicts the above.
> -- 
> 2.34.1
> 
> 

Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: qcom: readme: document preferred compatible naming

[Konrad Dybcio]

On 1.07.2022 22:42, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 01, 2022 at 09:46:59AM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> Compatibles can come in two formats.  Either "vendor,ip-soc" or
>> "vendor,soc-ip".  Qualcomm bindings were mixing both of usages, so add a
>> readme file documenting preferred policy.
> 
> Is this all I needed to do to stop this from QCom? </sarcasm>
> 
> This convention is not QCom specific, though the error mostly is. 
> Perhaps this should be documented generically.
> 
>> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>
>>
>> ---
>>
>> Cc: Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@linaro.org>
>> Cc: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@linaro.org>
>> Cc: Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org>
>> Cc: Alex Elder <elder@linaro.org>
>> Cc: Robert Foss <robert.foss@linaro.org>
>> Cc: Bhupesh Sharma <bhupesh.sharma@linaro.org>
>> ---
>>  .../devicetree/bindings/soc/qcom/README.rst      | 16 ++++++++++++++++
>>  1 file changed, 16 insertions(+)
>>  create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/qcom/README.rst
>>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/qcom/README.rst b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/qcom/README.rst
>> new file mode 100644
>> index 000000000000..322b329ac7c1
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/qcom/README.rst
>> @@ -0,0 +1,16 @@
>> +.. SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause
>> +
>> +Qualcomm SoC compatibles naming convention
>> +==========================================
>> +1. When adding new compatibles in new bindings, use the format:
>> +   ::
>> +
>> +     qcom,SoC-IP
>> +
>> +   For example:
>> +   ::
>> +
>> +     qcom,sdm845-llcc-bwmon
> 
> Assuming the list of possible SoCs was maintained, you could make this a 
> schema. Though there might be false positives.
Maybe there could be a list of *all* (maaaybe except the really vintage ones
that could barely run Linux at all, if even..), qcom SoCs (for example based
on the Wikipedia one [1]) that would account for future porting and could be
updated with new platforms as they get released?

Konrad

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Qualcomm_Snapdragon_processors
>
>> +
>> +2. When adding new compatibles to existing bindings, use the format
>> +   in the existing binding, even if it contradicts the above.
>> -- 
>> 2.34.1
>>
>>

Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: qcom: readme: document preferred compatible naming

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 01/07/2022 22:42, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 01, 2022 at 09:46:59AM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> Compatibles can come in two formats.  Either "vendor,ip-soc" or
>> "vendor,soc-ip".  Qualcomm bindings were mixing both of usages, so add a
>> readme file documenting preferred policy.
> 
> Is this all I needed to do to stop this from QCom? </sarcasm>
> 
> This convention is not QCom specific, though the error mostly is. 
> Perhaps this should be documented generically.

Good point. I can this to writing-bindings.rst.

> 
>> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>
>>
>> ---
>>
>> Cc: Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@linaro.org>
>> Cc: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@linaro.org>
>> Cc: Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org>
>> Cc: Alex Elder <elder@linaro.org>
>> Cc: Robert Foss <robert.foss@linaro.org>
>> Cc: Bhupesh Sharma <bhupesh.sharma@linaro.org>
>> ---
>>  .../devicetree/bindings/soc/qcom/README.rst      | 16 ++++++++++++++++
>>  1 file changed, 16 insertions(+)
>>  create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/qcom/README.rst
>>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/qcom/README.rst b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/qcom/README.rst
>> new file mode 100644
>> index 000000000000..322b329ac7c1
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/qcom/README.rst
>> @@ -0,0 +1,16 @@
>> +.. SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause
>> +
>> +Qualcomm SoC compatibles naming convention
>> +==========================================
>> +1. When adding new compatibles in new bindings, use the format:
>> +   ::
>> +
>> +     qcom,SoC-IP
>> +
>> +   For example:
>> +   ::
>> +
>> +     qcom,sdm845-llcc-bwmon
> 
> Assuming the list of possible SoCs was maintained, you could make this a 
> schema. Though there might be false positives.

Indeed it works, although I need some exceptions for existing compatibles.


Best regards,
Krzysztof