From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Arnd Bergmann Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2013 08:19:51 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/9] ARM: shmobile: APE6EVM: add MMCIF and SDHI DT nodes Message-Id: <201306211019.52102.arnd@arndb.de> List-Id: References: <1368802520-16378-8-git-send-email-g.liakhovetski@gmx.de> In-Reply-To: <1368802520-16378-8-git-send-email-g.liakhovetski@gmx.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: linux-sh@vger.kernel.org On Friday 21 June 2013, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote: > My preference still lies with specific per-feature driver bindings like in > my original implementation. Adding compatible strings to every driver for > every new SoC seems an absolute no-go to me. But with per-feature driver > bindings you would have exactly the same problem: if you later add support > for a new feature to the driver, and that feature is present on older > SoCs, the only way to enable it would be to replace the DT. That is the main problem with the per-feature listing, but less of a problem if you list both the original part and the specific name of the new one in the compatible string. It's also not an either-or thing. For a number of features, having flags makes most sense, in particular when the feature is not a property of the IP block but of the way it is connected to the rest of the SoC. Arnd