From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.7 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED, USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E8EE3C37124 for ; Tue, 22 Jan 2019 00:19:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B67CC2089F for ; Tue, 22 Jan 2019 00:19:24 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1548116364; bh=lN3AhrWOK1+g7P2zBNux+Cd4POCtJyJpbZgLuC0hTN0=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:List-ID:From; b=tsaMkWzl3e2TSYMkEhNHhg9YQfBIfNu9cqGNK6jPNv6i7MjW37qazgYtX75+xlkvc aQtKa6Q+NzCMWIJJ5iq+d1KsdQrrfJtVWRxb8ku8ugg4Ynh2NLQ+e2l2NdmOZiGpgW h0QW8oG5wGD1kwFA9Qg0m26T/6m4+468UP8ujS9A= Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1725999AbfAVATU (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 Jan 2019 19:19:20 -0500 Received: from mail-ot1-f67.google.com ([209.85.210.67]:37985 "EHLO mail-ot1-f67.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725941AbfAVATU (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 Jan 2019 19:19:20 -0500 Received: by mail-ot1-f67.google.com with SMTP id e12so22121564otl.5; Mon, 21 Jan 2019 16:19:19 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=5uCyXnnGfFbiQg6fSTWCRBCQgl6eqCHGAfdzWE9E2OY=; b=cZhGsUtVQpwpset7L6PLRoXBz0J9Q6sSX8uPBplCOsuM5hffEqrHl6+TLE1r4gNJbZ ucwiX7Qfz+euXEN7brW8iNFkTQYO+aXzVSu6P5GvM6Jv1Mv3r4A4DzKhS38oLdNg4kpT f6T/GVrRv5gR58JEVchy47XVn5UhVXXAv2K//FDtUaTZLPdxe+bRwanvl6ujFsIbVwpa iIvXqBmqwtwhCBIs6ohZ7AAZvVCW05u3omCYYL6ptIWQKdDVz+nWwzP8imCVQhFbJcTC l/u5PkfoQVIdkT4Gdsojqww3o4e7y/l9rKqoGcUTZ/0rgNGpQ7u99SLM06b6qSMn9dp9 c6lg== X-Gm-Message-State: AJcUukdVH4n2R9u1FTT9c+f9BYV1yMBZS6jvZ7F7KsiD+5ZPb3YayBWJ x7qQaOArdmQlvtKQHuhuLw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ALg8bN5tGyQfgsz8Qibh5c9U/V1vKGStMgN7eNkGmxtb8BiQO+UrRmQ9ow9YayylM9E6/Hs3EDyNIA== X-Received: by 2002:a9d:77d4:: with SMTP id w20mr20274216otl.196.1548116359080; Mon, 21 Jan 2019 16:19:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (24-155-109-49.dyn.grandenetworks.net. [24.155.109.49]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id l20sm6204181otp.47.2019.01.21.16.19.18 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Mon, 21 Jan 2019 16:19:18 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2019 18:19:17 -0600 From: Rob Herring To: Chen-Yu Tsai Cc: Maxime Ripard , Jernej Skrabec , Mark Rutland , Mauro Carvalho Chehab , Linux Media Mailing List , devicetree , linux-arm-kernel , linux-kernel , linux-sunxi Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] media: dt: bindings: sunxi-ir: Add A64 compatible Message-ID: <20190122001917.GA31407@bogus> References: <20190111173015.12119-1-jernej.skrabec@siol.net> <20190111173015.12119-2-jernej.skrabec@siol.net> <20190121095014.b6iq5dubfi7x2pi4@flea> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Sender: linux-media-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-media@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 05:57:57PM +0800, Chen-Yu Tsai wrote: > On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 5:50 PM Maxime Ripard wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > I'm a bit late to the party, sorry for that. > > > > On Sat, Jan 12, 2019 at 09:56:11AM +0800, Chen-Yu Tsai wrote: > > > On Sat, Jan 12, 2019 at 1:30 AM Jernej Skrabec wrote: > > > > > > > > A64 IR is compatible with A13, so add A64 compatible with A13 as a > > > > fallback. > > > > > > We ask people to add the SoC-specific compatible as a contigency, > > > in case things turn out to be not so "compatible". > > > > > > To be consistent with all the other SoCs and other peripherals, > > > unless you already spotted a "compatible" difference in the > > > hardware, i.e. the hardware isn't completely the same, this > > > patch isn't needed. On the other hand, if you did, please mention > > > the differences in the commit log. > > > > Even if we don't spot things, since we have the stable DT now, if we > > ever had that compatible in the DT from day 1, it's much easier to > > deal with. > > > > I'd really like to have that pattern for all the IPs even if we didn't > > spot any issue, since we can't really say that the datasheet are > > complete, and one can always make a mistake and overlook something. > > > > I'm fine with this version, and can apply it as is if we all agree. > > I'm OK with having the fallback compatible. I'm just pointing out > that there are and will be a whole bunch of them, and we don't need > to document all of them unless we are actually doing something to > support them. Yes, you do. Otherwise, how will we validate what is and isn't a valid set of compatible strings? It's not required yet, but bindings are moving to json-schema. Rob