Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: vendor-prefixes: add kfr prefix

[Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>]

On 14/11/2025 11:19, Gilles BULOZ wrote:
> Le 14/11/2025 à 10:32, Krzysztof Kozlowski a écrit :
> 
>> On 14/11/2025 10:23, Gilles BULOZ wrote:
>>> Le 14/11/2025 à 09:40, Krzysztof Kozlowski a écrit :
>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 14/11/2025 08:53, Gilles BULOZ wrote:
>>>>> Add kfr vendor prefix for Kontron France, which is a single-board
>>>>> computer (SBC) manufacturer.
>>>> There is no user for this.
>>> Hi Krzysztof,
>>>
>>> Yes, there's no user for vendor "kfr" in kernel tree, but Kontron has
>>> produced some ARM boards (VM6103,VX3106,VX6124,VX3124) on which we
>>> ported uboot and added some entries in device tree for board specific
>>> devices (CPLD) using vendor "kfr". We also provide a Linux BSP for these
>>> boards with drivers using compatible = kfr,<cpldchip>.
>>> My patch was just to reserve this vendor officially so that no other
>> You have entire commit msg to explain unusual things. Your commit msg
>> must explain WHY you are doing it so we know WHY we would want to accept
>> that patch. If you do not want to convince me why I want this patch
>> then... I don't want that patch (please watch Greg's talk titled that way).
> 
> Sorry, I had a look to the mailing list archive and did as another developer
> did to have a vendor added to the list, but his patch also added new drivers
> using this vendor, unlike mine.
> 
> I also did not understand you answer "there is no user for this" but I
> guessed, I hope right.
> 
>>
>> Anyway, you cannot "reserve" prefix. You must reference here the
>> upstream user, if it is not obvious.
> 
> With "upstream user", do you mean a driver in the official kernel tree ?
> In this case there's none : we provide our drivers out-of-tree in a BSP package.

Upstream user, or user in this context, is any upstream open-source
project using these bindings or in-kernel DTS.

out-of-tree forks are not upstream, thus does not count here, sorry.


> 
>>
>> Plus I am pretty sure Kontron already has prefix and there is no point
>> for another one. How many companies Samsung has? 10? 20? How many prefixes?
> 
> Yes there's already "Kontron S&T AG" but as Kontron France is making very
> specific products, I thought this was possible to have a different vendor as
> for ACPI/PNP ID registry where Kontron has four entries. Maybe this rule is
> written somewhere but I was not aware and did not see device-tree vendors as
> a rare resource.

One prefix is just enough, there are no benefits usually of having more.

Best regards,
Krzysztof