From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (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 C92DA1C01; Tue, 18 Jun 2024 04:34:15 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1718685255; cv=none; b=aOsn4/54SLnuuwBx0J/ov/QDNBtvCT7Byh4QAcp2zzbEMY6VJvZbJOz6xI89Q2kA1zV800X46mI8JDz6gDERWZdqHi3z6oto2z40S+ip7jAzM8uptlgARdzYJSNCJH4R0ySg6GmccuUOe/XvFfgehkz7pg58/ZX7cdUFPjNFMdQ= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1718685255; c=relaxed/simple; bh=cVWaqdmlVB3MhB8ZS2KfEGlzyVZFQobqyrEiIiYPoSA=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=TI8YZGGnW7dD6DlGFuSSUzQcdZu77t2JwfsQxUsz7DnxeFVIoDqTvfYHJPAqjnhjBZ3LMooPfiEbI3jqILTUpPO+1hh7RgCFc4aVyP2cGOuNvsBI+JIF4OuYzXiEWOAn/g5keTBP6GAbIWdryGygRuGQGGeqA9ktpf+XfcTTzrA= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=gTi7MVJl; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="gTi7MVJl" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 812B6C3277B; Tue, 18 Jun 2024 04:34:11 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1718685255; bh=cVWaqdmlVB3MhB8ZS2KfEGlzyVZFQobqyrEiIiYPoSA=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=gTi7MVJlvd3DqJpnKOKwG1xNN9+M3Gsd6MebltbzdgYOGnNyiv6Qeq+xhqfRbROut SMeCl95OGHDBKyeXsKqzjZiu8nRdzT8VF3nwmPVGyANifUQ4IVXBEyLiZbRBuA+r0p kkJXl0ojinTkXRpSpsx3wYcxcPeHcuHbPZKbHXToNiDVwXn/Rz1XfUQPLNhFqQRota Ji/Wh9lpLMGRuNhNmj0DSutuZbOngGorasQOGUjC3tgjSPUjrrJ+nW6aPnlpo7rFMl BobHJwR5iAtT1Vvtyk20SeGII31d7mB1TqYIv6xVcD0QEwS+Lp2lQuDtie5Zzz8Zc+ WZdChbx6OiHBA== Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2024 12:20:13 +0800 From: Jisheng Zhang To: Samuel Holland Cc: Thomas Bonnefille , Yixun Lan , Inochi Amaoto , Rob Herring , Krzysztof Kozlowski , Conor Dooley , Paul Walmsley , Chen Wang , Chao Wei , Albert Ou , Palmer Dabbelt , Thomas Gleixner , Daniel Lezcano , Thomas Petazzoni , =?utf-8?Q?Miqu=C3=A8l?= Raynal , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, Conor Dooley Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/6] riscv: dts: sophgo: Put sdhci compatible in dt of specific SoC Message-ID: References: <20240612-sg2002-v2-0-19a585af6846@bootlin.com> <20240612-sg2002-v2-1-19a585af6846@bootlin.com> <20240616235829.GA4000183@ofsar> <20240617-exuberant-protegee-f7d414f0976d@spud> <6a993b58-3d9e-4f92-bf47-7692c9639314@sifive.com> 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-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <6a993b58-3d9e-4f92-bf47-7692c9639314@sifive.com> On Mon, Jun 17, 2024 at 10:57:54AM -0500, Samuel Holland wrote: > Hi Jisheng, Thomas, > > On 2024-06-17 10:40 AM, Conor Dooley wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 17, 2024 at 09:16:43PM +0800, Jisheng Zhang wrote: > >> On Mon, Jun 17, 2024 at 11:16:32AM +0200, Thomas Bonnefille wrote: > >>> On 6/17/24 1:58 AM, Yixun Lan wrote: > >>>> On 18:47 Wed 12 Jun , Inochi Amaoto wrote: > > > >>>>> Is this change necessary? IIRC, the sdhci is the same across > >>>>> the whole series. > > > >> sorry for being late, I was busy in the past 2.5 month. Per my > >> understanding, the sdhci in cv1800b is the same as the one in > >> sg200x. Maybe I'm wrong, but this was my impression when I cooked > >> the sdhci driver patch for these SoCs. > >> > >>>> I tend to agree with Inochi here, if it's same across all SoC, then no bother to > >>>> split, it will cause more trouble to maintain.. > >>>> > >>> > >>> To be honest, I agree with this to, but as a specific compatible for the > >>> SG2002 was created in commit 849e81817b9b, I thought that the best practice > >>> was to use it. > >> > >> I'd like to take this chance to query DT maintainers: FWICT, in the past > >> even if the PLIC is the same between SoCs, adding a new compatible for > >> them seems a must. So when time goes on, the compatbile list would be > >> longer and longer, is it really necessary? Can we just use the existing > >> compatible string? > >> DT maintainers may answered the query in the past, if so, sorry for > >> querying again. > > > > For new integrations of an IP, yes, new specific compatibles please. New > > integrations may have different bugs etc, even if the IP itself is the > > same. If there's different SoCs that are the same die, but with elements > > fused off, then sure, use the same compatible. > > > > I expect the list of compatibles in the binding to grow rather large, but > > that is fine. No one SoC is going to do anything other than something like > > compatible = "renesas,$soc-plic", "andestech,corecomplex-plic", "riscv,plic"; > > which I think is perfectly fine. > > And you can do the same thing here for the SDHCI controller: if you think sg200x > has the same controller (and integration! e.g. number of clocks/resets) as > cv1800b, then you should keep sophgo,cv1800b-dwcmshc as a fallback compatible > string. Then the driver doesn't need any changes until/unless you eventually > find some reason they are not compatible. > > It's better to have a SoC-specific compatible string in the DT and not need it, > than find out later you need one and not have it. :) Good idea, this solution looks better! Thanks for the suggestion > > Regards, > Samuel >