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

[Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>]

On 21/07/2022 09:13, Rafał Miłecki wrote:
>> 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.

Maybe there is some common part of a SoC which that generic compatible
would express?

Most archs don't use soc-wide generic compatible, because of reasons I
mentioned - no actual benefits for anyone from such compatible.

But there are exceptions. I fouun socfpga and apple. The apple sounds as
mistake to me, because the generic "apple,arm-platform" compatible looks
like covering all possible Apple ARM platforms. I think Apple ARM
designs in 20 years will not be compatible at all with current design,
so such broad compatible is not useful... but that's only my opinion.

> 
> 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

This would be tricky as it was already accepted, unless all sit in
linux-next and did not make to v5.19-rc1.

Best regards,
Krzysztof