From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from metis.whiteo.stw.pengutronix.de (metis.whiteo.stw.pengutronix.de [185.203.201.7]) (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 33C531922F5 for ; Wed, 10 Jul 2024 10:32:29 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=185.203.201.7 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1720607550; cv=none; b=g8C1ei1Wvbay70DtAKfgXOwE0mjAIPYXDmTUo8GZH1IyMWOkY98bFom0etnq2Ac0YIXzRQrrwON9gvvl7dHy/bC2neTbDCSgglGHt2U0adzbGP94nn332dIGGKhacURshlsdYRm07aZTJchpQqnv9XVNdBS6YyI4W5IjSCVhZdA= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1720607550; c=relaxed/simple; bh=fTQ7zkRLNDCLn/p4WuewCqh1pWrTOX5y6H7fbS4cZeU=; h=Message-ID:Subject:From:To:Cc:Date:In-Reply-To:References: Content-Type:MIME-Version; b=UrwVLg6D3r1T2VOauB3wPobuplqxsQX/3reXkEUEwnaQgdYFXcsf9QVCck2iJYa4Kh7iWnh6rDi+VAIcfoQy5sV/s5WE7ud/vaNGhcKLouKHuhk7ejl9MbC3Aiq/pIcZyq0SmTT6JbUWuTmpNirykRCPkmrz7qjRcNlQi2G0D4Y= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=pengutronix.de; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pengutronix.de; arc=none smtp.client-ip=185.203.201.7 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=pengutronix.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pengutronix.de Received: from drehscheibe.grey.stw.pengutronix.de ([2a0a:edc0:0:c01:1d::a2]) by metis.whiteo.stw.pengutronix.de with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1sRUcX-0001wy-IB; Wed, 10 Jul 2024 12:32:21 +0200 Received: from [2a0a:edc0:0:900:1d::4e] (helo=lupine) by drehscheibe.grey.stw.pengutronix.de with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1sRUcX-008Ui7-4a; Wed, 10 Jul 2024 12:32:21 +0200 Received: from pza by lupine with local (Exim 4.96) (envelope-from ) id 1sRUcX-0006FY-0F; Wed, 10 Jul 2024 12:32:21 +0200 Message-ID: <863e5bcd9160090f3b9a93f70da0de50d5efbe9a.camel@pengutronix.de> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] dt-bindings: input: touchscreen: exc3000: add EXC81W32 From: Philipp Zabel To: Conor Dooley Cc: Dmitry Torokhov , Rob Herring , Krzysztof Kozlowski , Conor Dooley , linux-input@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel@pengutronix.de Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2024 12:32:20 +0200 In-Reply-To: <20240701-evolve-unbutton-ef7d913ad69f@spud> References: <20240628-input-exc3000-exc81w32-v2-0-c2b21a369c05@pengutronix.de> <20240628-input-exc3000-exc81w32-v2-1-c2b21a369c05@pengutronix.de> <20240628-agonizing-syrup-fcd55c441b3f@spud> <150055844b8af2017fa721ff08bbde473354b2da.camel@pengutronix.de> <20240701-evolve-unbutton-ef7d913ad69f@spud> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable User-Agent: Evolution 3.46.4-2 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: devicetree@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 2a0a:edc0:0:c01:1d::a2 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: p.zabel@pengutronix.de X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on metis.whiteo.stw.pengutronix.de); SAEximRunCond expanded to false X-PTX-Original-Recipient: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On Mo, 2024-07-01 at 15:42 +0100, Conor Dooley wrote: > On Mon, Jul 01, 2024 at 02:47:50PM +0200, Philipp Zabel wrote: > > Hi Conor, > >=20 > > On Fr, 2024-06-28 at 17:21 +0100, Conor Dooley wrote: > > > On Fri, Jun 28, 2024 at 10:35:51AM +0200, Philipp Zabel wrote: > > > > Add compatible for EXC81W32 touchscreen controllers. > > >=20 > > > Could you please mention in your commit messages what makes a fallbac= k > > > compatible inappropriate here? > >=20 > > thank for pointing this out. Actually, I'm not sure a fallback > > compatible is inappropriate at all. There just is none currently, even > > though EXC80H60 and EXC80H84 already look compatible to me. > >=20 > > To my understanding, there's EXC80[WH]{32,46,60,84} models, that should > > only differ in ball pitch (W or H) and targeted display size (the last > > number). > > I don't know if there are actual relevant differences between what I > > assume are model generations, such as EXC80 to EXC81. At least the > > limited currently implemented feature set in the exc3000 driver is > > identical. > >=20 > > Given that EXC80H60, EXC80H84, and now EXC81W32 all share the same 16K > > resolution and the same message format (possible differences in > > capability to measure touch area nonwithstanding), should I prepend > > this series with a patch: >=20 > If you're prepared to update the two users to avoid adding more > dtbs_check warnings, sure. I'll follow up with another patch series, thanks. regards Philipp