From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/6] dt-bindings: interrupt-controller: RISC-V PLIC documentation Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2018 11:55:27 +0200 Message-ID: <20180802095527.GD14203@lst.de> References: <20180725093649.32332-1-hch@lst.de> <20180725093649.32332-7-hch@lst.de> <20180731224630.GB12168@rob-hp-laptop> <20180801071635.GC20224@lst.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Rob Herring Cc: Christoph Hellwig , Thomas Gleixner , Palmer Dabbelt , Jason Cooper , Marc Zyngier , Mark Rutland , devicetree@vger.kernel.org, Albert Ou , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, Stafford Horne , Palmer Dabbelt List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Aug 01, 2018 at 12:26:31PM -0600, Rob Herring wrote: > Not really my problem that they didn't follow the process and upstream > their binding first. But this alone is just a string identifier, so I > don't really care that much. If things are really a mess, then the > next implementations will have to have better compatible strings. More > likely, I'll just see folks trying to add various properties to deal > with all the differences. > > You could always define a better compatible and leave 'riscv,plic0' as > a fallback to avoid breaking things. Is there any better way to define a compatible other than having duplicate IRQCHIP_DECLARE() statements?