Re: [RESEND PATCH 2/9] dt-bindings: arm64: bcmbca: Update BCM4908 description

["Rafał Miłecki" <rafal@milecki.pl>]

On 2022-07-21 09:01, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 21/07/2022 08:51, Rafał Miłecki wrote:
>> On 2022-07-21 08:44, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>> On 21/07/2022 02:06, William Zhang wrote:
>>>> Append "brcm,bcmbca" to BCM4908 chip family compatible strings. Add
>>>> generic 4908 board entry.
>>> 
>>> This does not explain at all why you are doing it. Improve your 
>>> commit
>>> messages.
>> 
>> To clarify it from my side (and maybe help a bit):
>> 
>> 1. As I understand it BCMBCA is a one big family of SoCs.
>> 2. BCM4908 is a subset of that family (a subfamily?) designed for a
>>     specific group of devices.
>> 
>> If that's correct I think William it's what you should describe in 
>> your
>> commit message. That would make binding more accurate and should be a
>> good argument for your change (I believe).
> 
> That's better argument. But what's the benefit of adding generic
> compatible? Devices cannot bind to it (it is too generic). Does it
> describe the device anyhow? Imagine someone adding compatible
> "brcm,all-soc-of-broadcom" - does it make any sense?

OK, I see it now. I can't think of any case of handling all devices
covered with suc a wide brcm,bcmbca binding.

This leads me to another question if we should actually totally drop
brcm,bcmbca from other SoCs bindings, see linux-next's
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/bcm/brcm,bcmbca.yaml