From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Geert Uytterhoeven Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] ARM: shmobile: kzm9g dts: Use adxl345-specific compatible property Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2015 11:26:32 +0200 Message-ID: References: <1436180132-26190-1-git-send-email-geert+renesas@glider.be> <15966074.zDS67FO48r@avalon> <20150707002621.GD13326@verge.net.au> <9389528.5qtaECVqX7@avalon> <20150708005148.GA28100@verge.net.au> <20150813000537.GD5221@verge.net.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20150813000537.GD5221@verge.net.au> Sender: linux-sh-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Simon Horman Cc: Laurent Pinchart , Geert Uytterhoeven , Linux-sh list , Magnus Damm , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , "linux-input@vger.kernel.org" , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" List-Id: linux-input@vger.kernel.org Hi Simon, On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 2:05 AM, Simon Horman wrote: > On Wed, Jul 08, 2015 at 09:51:49AM +0900, Simon Horman wrote: >> On Tue, Jul 07, 2015 at 09:56:29AM +0300, Laurent Pinchart wrote: >> > On Tuesday 07 July 2015 09:26:21 Simon Horman wrote: >> > > On Mon, Jul 06, 2015 at 04:29:33PM +0300, Laurent Pinchart wrote: >> > > > On Monday 06 July 2015 12:55:32 Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: >> > > > > Replace the deprecated generic "adi,adxl34x" compatible value by the >> > > > > adxl345-specific "adi,adxl345" value, cfr. commit e465bf6fc55d5ce2 ("DT: >> > > > > i2c: Deprecate adi,adxl34x compatible string"). >> > > > > >> > > > > Signed-off-by: Geert Uytterhoeven >> > > > >> > > > Acked-by: Laurent Pinchart >> > > > >> > > > > --- >> > > > > Depends on commit 3a38958d2477b718 ("Input: adxl34x - add OF match >> > > > > support"), which is in v4.2-rc1. >> > > > > >> > > > > This is v2 of "ARM: shmobile: kzm9g dts: Add adxl345-specific compatible >> > > > > property". >> > > >> > > It appears to me that this will cause a regression when booting old kernels >> > > with new dts blobs. For that reason think we should consider v1 >> > > of this change coupled with a schedule to remove use of the deprecated >> > > compat string. >> > >> > That's the forward compatibility that Geert mentioned, is that really an >> > issue, especially on this board ? >> >> I think it would be best to provide backwards compatibility unless there >> is a compelling reason not to. > > I would like to revisit this discussion with a view to getting some version > of this patch queued up (yes I know I pushed back on it earlier in this thread). I'm fine with applying v1. Gr{oetje,eeting}s, Geert -- Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that. -- Linus Torvalds