From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from bali.collaboradmins.com (bali.collaboradmins.com [148.251.105.195]) (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 4E3A03BCD15; Thu, 9 Jul 2026 11:58:17 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=148.251.105.195 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1783598300; cv=none; b=WDr3h9KAMXuF5XJnjMveU9S6OD34Y5Do6PUjCHX3l7Mfw0QWUAZ+YQ9rxO09VcQM6KL96uqFwTxc0Wj8xlVcAmTa3GqLqcrxLqKOa+U0EF7oB6JfdPqWheZRcuZwT5K2BFGnpKTKwgAliAHXkSVbr0QrvcsW6zbD/BixvQ2F9To= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1783598300; c=relaxed/simple; bh=0l8hKYZsEJCMBNL+X7+mtDqQz8nsijJQ7qlJBYs68jw=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=uNfGCzIMlwA99/+4Bf0aUZYGzp3kWFd7lUeUMaeq4I5fpzollRIdqXcMgSgOH+dUZlDtfEJRZWHYU5hp0SI4e1G7xVuleJADUhLIeWuuUZbmp4Vk21d9wZrX2RVl8ReUwtjmpUMxmM3B4aRhX2N8h2y/pnA2TTYNjnedhislu2c= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=collabora.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=collabora.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=collabora.com header.i=@collabora.com header.b=ZDjPdkfS; arc=none smtp.client-ip=148.251.105.195 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=collabora.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=collabora.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=collabora.com header.i=@collabora.com header.b="ZDjPdkfS" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=collabora.com; s=mail; t=1783598295; bh=0l8hKYZsEJCMBNL+X7+mtDqQz8nsijJQ7qlJBYs68jw=; h=Date:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:In-Reply-To:From; b=ZDjPdkfSK69yVmIaEAk1+TJxeZr8mt+7OsHyjIIl6rYXJv89ODdh/Z/fyjs99nt48 EgJ2tCrQzWssQva7MvmvBfhnY22o3ASoF/lkc8XCza3wyxbJDCE2KEAttCXIeNr7AH xQlVvlT4eFsXxZdtbQ3e+FucWTc0XjMTi5O+grXYz9Q8ea4Q4MrCvQtPf8U6VHI9Qh QDyEzfGWZNgIUR7IqF/sCl8gxbbplLYyfNhdajB3mSrrwxhuv/vUuDtVlN9CWonlyk NkG5x1h/e/R0ZFtXZffqJWlyZRnAjfYLQ5UGkXdwJ5JmjewOR+U9LvGbjJq84oGfOJ GOi8azvVyfV1Q== Received: from [100.64.1.21] (unknown [100.64.1.21]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange x25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: kholk11) by bali.collaboradmins.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id ADF0D17E019E; Thu, 09 Jul 2026 13:58:14 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: Date: Thu, 9 Jul 2026 13:58:14 +0200 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/3] dt-bindings: pinctrl: mt8516/mt8167: Move compatibles from mt66xx to mt6795 To: Luca Leonardo Scorcia , Conor Dooley Cc: linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org, Sean Wang , Linus Walleij , Rob Herring , Krzysztof Kozlowski , Conor Dooley , Matthias Brugger , linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org References: <20260625104742.113803-1-l.scorcia@gmail.com> <20260625104742.113803-2-l.scorcia@gmail.com> <20260625-cameo-siamese-cd78c349519c@spud> <20260625-unearth-suffering-e2c59d39da0f@spud> From: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno Content-Language: en-US In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 6/26/26 11:12, Luca Leonardo Scorcia wrote: >> Usually when making ABI changes because something was inaccurate (but >> not wrong to the point that it didn't work at all) it's possible to >> support both new and old ABIs at the same time because of new properties >> etc. This is a difficult one because it's using the same properties in >> different ways. A new compatible would definitely be required for a >> genuine fresh start while retaining kernel support for the old mechanism >> in this case. > > All things considered, the cleanest solution seems to be adding a new > compatible, mark the old one as deprecated and also try to fix the old > driver code. I'll try to do that before submitting again. > Thank you for your help! You can skip the "fix the old driver code" part. The only users here are demo boards that aren't even used that much and besides, they're even hard to find. Cheers, Angelo