From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D172C46467 for ; Sat, 7 Jan 2023 15:55:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229695AbjAGPzK (ORCPT ); Sat, 7 Jan 2023 10:55:10 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:47878 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229488AbjAGPzJ (ORCPT ); Sat, 7 Jan 2023 10:55:09 -0500 Received: from mail.andi.de1.cc (mail.andi.de1.cc [IPv6:2a01:238:4321:8900:456f:ecd6:43e:202c]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 03D2148282; Sat, 7 Jan 2023 07:55:07 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kemnade.info; s=20220719; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type: MIME-Version:References:In-Reply-To:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Sender :Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From: Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help: List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=5QP2y28Pcs2SHwNV9ir1T4SjGjQeLqFRFf0BaMs0S6o=; b=TMzutHcI6ZmP7/Rz18J6uZ1waD 5ogifUgMWTyAnCLPRoGkeYabVEHEdJx8hvsjLjRQ/e8FAlcKt5BaqbXd6HLfBwBzhcl43AsOX/Wl6 k0bqLZ6PSmytRKGl0klAQT7VPyos1GmQf1urQbD4as72MncjyE3BtiLdRrCvJW1vPYhT5hmovGfeY Q7YeLEVwsz4YijySO6cjLPAIn0ByDdul3xxYBtHeFyPGgcxlMWN3Hyc8URXkcNrUgVEUNbCKXEpmx qUrgGFjNWpHDyJd9S9EONXOSrRul3/lHnGYctZ+OzOxALfqLZ6c5V1c8Am5bM1ZNFWuGYMngvviTc feXihTbw==; Received: from p200300ccff2fec001a3da2fffebfd33a.dip0.t-ipconnect.de ([2003:cc:ff2f:ec00:1a3d:a2ff:febf:d33a] helo=aktux) by mail.andi.de1.cc with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1pEBX8-0005JY-OI; Sat, 07 Jan 2023 16:54:58 +0100 Date: Sat, 7 Jan 2023 16:54:57 +0100 From: Andreas Kemnade To: Krzysztof Kozlowski Cc: ulf.hansson@linaro.org, robh+dt@kernel.org, krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org, shawnguo@kernel.org, s.hauer@pengutronix.de, kernel@pengutronix.de, festevam@gmail.com, linux-imx@nxp.com, linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: mmc: fsl-imx-esdhc: allow more compatible combinations Message-ID: <20230107165457.30f4dddf@aktux> In-Reply-To: References: <20230105213856.1828360-1-andreas@kemnade.info> <20230106203358.14878660@aktux> <967cc7b7-f0bb-de37-52b9-7bfab05eadd7@linaro.org> <20230107144336.2ecff4f9@aktux> <123d1a56-8134-dc75-8b2a-b3836e727d4a@linaro.org> <20230107150740.0ba34aa1@aktux> <0ab84fb8-6173-54e0-abad-a0e0e4ba82e7@linaro.org> <20230107160105.66df4136@aktux> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.17.8 (GTK+ 2.24.33; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On Sat, 7 Jan 2023 16:07:35 +0100 Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 07/01/2023 16:01, Andreas Kemnade wrote: > > On Sat, 7 Jan 2023 15:09:24 +0100 > > Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > > > >> On 07/01/2023 15:07, Andreas Kemnade wrote: > >>> On Sat, 7 Jan 2023 15:00:56 +0100 > >>> Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > >>> > >>> [...] > >>>>>> I asked to remove half-compatible. Not to enforce. > >>>>>> > >>> so you are saying that allowing > >>> compatible = "A", "B" > >>> is not ok, if B is not fully compatible. I agree with that > >>> one. > >> > >> I did not say that. It's not related to this problem. > >> > > You said "I asked to remove half-compatible" that means to me > > remove "B" if not fully compatible with A which sounds sane to me. > > > >> Again - you cannot have device which is and is not compatible with > >> something else. It's not a Schroedinger's cat to be in two states, > >> unless you explicitly document the cases (there are exception). If this > >> is such exception, it requires it's own documentation. > >> > > so conclusion: > > If having A and B half-compatible with A: > > > > compatible = "A" only: is allowed to specifiy it the binding (status quo), > > but not allowed to make the actual dtsi match the binding documentation > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-devicetree/72e1194e10ccb4f87aed96265114f0963e805092.camel@pengutronix.de/ > > and > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-devicetree/20210924091439.2561931-5-andreas@kemnade.info/ > > > > compatible = "A", "B" in the binding definition: is not allowed ("I asked to remove > > half-compatible" (= removing B)) > > No, half compatible is the A in such case. > I think that there is some misunderstanding in here. I try once again. Define compatible with "X" here: To me it means: device fully works with flags defined in: static const struct esdhc_soc_data usdhc_X_data = { ... }; with usdhc_X_data referenced in { .compatible = "X", .data = &usdhc_X_data, }, So if there is only "A" matching with above definition of compatibility compatible = "A" would sound sane to me. And scrutinizing the flags more and not just wanting to achieve error-free dtbs_check, I think is this in most cases where there is only "A". If there is "A" and "B" which match that compatibility definition, you say that only compatible = "A", "B" is allowed, but not compatible = "A". In that case I would have no problem with that. But if there is only "A" but no "B" matching the above definition, I would expect that only compatible = "A" is allowed but *not* compatible = "A", "B". Regards, Andreas