From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from relay1-d.mail.gandi.net (relay1-d.mail.gandi.net [217.70.183.193]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C9D051DA303; Tue, 9 Jul 2024 07:27:33 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=217.70.183.193 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1720510057; cv=none; b=BtDLx5/dMiXstK0VmC94lAOGMuEE1I4U8lwvMBrsa4JWnfmOUQrSyxURmCqfbzNDNgILpBUTV+33DhRp/7dHbUsT/MhBCJC/W/GE/UvgYALNuIU6lCr9GBF4nEZYNJtJeD3b39R6iLY7Av8W+G+tX2TgWyHTcPYOmWe47iyok8s= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1720510057; c=relaxed/simple; bh=XSbWc+QmMsURRHs5VQZCMpBJk/ZJQzofXzukTl77Teg=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=ttnNosACUTP7LvbqOiZSYfyZ5vJJRFfXBbOBffFJmcl4FA49shf9v6h1jeRa/ErkdjxVymj7H81YnFuuIQLk3wOpDUC2nzsQyzo5lh7SzGrYQCA/tneVjZTssqheEkHTyPQxt1iNFVmUmNkscaXqSgcLRjCNg58jgEf2cXWrRjE= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=bootlin.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=bootlin.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=bootlin.com header.i=@bootlin.com header.b=Ceyuq7Ny; arc=none smtp.client-ip=217.70.183.193 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=bootlin.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=bootlin.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=bootlin.com header.i=@bootlin.com header.b="Ceyuq7Ny" Received: by mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 22E2D24000B; Tue, 9 Jul 2024 07:27:24 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=bootlin.com; s=gm1; t=1720510046; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=HibcTUfYnEmcYJNR1chZFfn71QJWTGsOoH5RNfwQefg=; b=Ceyuq7NyzSiJ0uMtuQPS2sSe0gfh1H5majfQZpQXoUjWx3QxtXz9+4GoC721Xm7Lb07AOj 72FNsBvyOpq9AlTa3A7OakQk8ZGSJ81B5t9w+LvVjQYYV8jluE0b3svt+hH6YgYF1Ecf/C KE2ukLJ8yebR/x0u28u7StSBV/Odz+R8a0z5n3pGrkAtslcJxyw6VlM12zIw+jcIsT+/7Y xSJKjKN6A8OaZYGr3syfyCBDgz1EyOp6cgB7caZOJMX0VxbP1MmJAXA4d6capMNp98tueB 8GNQGPFeTGs62oKyfIIj2XJsxc3Z1GApmK0C/ZuI8nAUZ/N457aBibvSVJpzcA== Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2024 09:27:22 +0200 From: Miquel Raynal To: Jonathan Cameron Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski , Conor Dooley , Thomas Bonnefille , Jonathan Cameron , Lars-Peter Clausen , Rob Herring , Krzysztof Kozlowski , Conor Dooley , Chen Wang , Inochi Amaoto , Paul Walmsley , "Palmer Dabbelt" , Albert Ou , "Thomas Petazzoni" , , , , Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] dt-bindings: iio: adc: sophgo,cv18xx-saradc.yaml: Add Sophgo SARADC binding documentation Message-ID: <20240709092722.1a3a2482@xps-13> In-Reply-To: <20240708165719.000021b9@Huawei.com> References: <20240705-sg2002-adc-v2-0-83428c20a9b2@bootlin.com> <20240705-sg2002-adc-v2-1-83428c20a9b2@bootlin.com> <20240705-unaired-pesticide-4135eaa04212@spud> <6b5459fd-2873-4c26-b986-882413b8d95b@bootlin.com> <20240706-remote-undergo-3b9dfe44d16f@spud> <20240708083011.058d0c57@xps-13> <304b7bb1-d315-4147-820b-1ec0aa63e759@kernel.org> <20240708142344.47da466e@xps-13> <20240708165719.000021b9@Huawei.com> Organization: Bootlin X-Mailer: Claws Mail 4.1.1 (GTK 3.24.38; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: devicetree@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-GND-Sasl: miquel.raynal@bootlin.com Hi Jonathan, > > > > * DO use fallback compatibles when devices are the same as or a sub= set > > > > of prior implementations. > > > >=20 > > > > I believe we fall in the "devices are the same" category, so I would > > > > have myself wrote a similar binding here with a compatible matching > > > > them all, plus a hardware-implementation-specific compatible as wel= l; > > > > just in case. =20 > > >=20 > > > Fallback from one model to another. There is no "another" model here, > > > but wildcard. There is no such device as cv18xx, right? =20 > >=20 > > No there is not. But I don't think there is a "base" model either. > > Just multiple SoCs named cv18 with apparently the same ADC. > >=20 > > So actually I guess the discussion here is about the wildcard > > compatible. It feels strange to me to have no generic compatible either > > with a wildcard or with a "base" implementation (because there is > > probably none). So I guess the solution here is to just list a single > > specific compatible in the end. >=20 > It comes from long experience of silicon vendors not being consistent > with part naming. Oh, agreed :-) > Far too often we've had a nice generic wild card > entry and along comes the vendor with a new part in the middle > of that range that is completely incompatible. Then we end up with > people assuming the wildcard means it will work and a bunch of bug > reports. Hence no wild cards, just define first supported part as your > 'base' and go from there. I see what you mean. I must admit I'm not a big fan of naming compatibles (and drivers) after a working base rather than a good enough wildcard, but I do understand your point and kind of agree with it actually. > It's even more fun when a vendor driver papers over the differences > and so it 'works', but the upstream one doesn't. In extreme case > because a different driver entirely is required. >=20 > So basically we don't trust silicon vendors :) > Speaking as someone who works for one - I think that's entirely > reasonable!! Haha <3 Thanks (once again) for your valuable inputs! Miqu=C3=A8l