Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 26 May 2022 13:03:04 +0530 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v4 1/3] dt-bindings: vendor-prefixes: Add 'ltr' as deprecated vendor prefix | From | Shreeya Patel <> |
| |
On 24/05/22 21:17, Rob Herring wrote: > On Mon, May 23, 2022 at 08:27:56PM +0530, Shreeya Patel wrote: >> On 18/05/22 22:02, Rob Herring wrote: >>> On Tue, May 17, 2022 at 04:07:33PM +0530, Shreeya Patel wrote: >>>> On 16/05/22 22:30, Rob Herring wrote: >>>>> On Wed, May 11, 2022 at 03:10:22PM +0530, Shreeya Patel wrote: >>>>>> 'liteon' is the correct vendor prefix for devices released by >>>>>> LITE-ON Technology Corp. But one of the released device which uses >>>>>> ltr216a light sensor exposes the vendor prefix name as 'ltr' through >>>>>> ACPI. >>>>> ACPI? NAK. >>>>> >>>>> There are no cases of 'ltr' for DT, so fix ACPI. >>>> Hi Rob, >>>> >>>> Yes, we understand there are no cases of 'ltr', but we have released devices >>>> which uses this string for probing the ltrf216a light sensor driver ( x86 >>>> with DT ) >>> That's not what your commit message says. >>> >>> Even if this is DT based, given an undocumented vendor string is used, >>> it seems doubtful the rest of the binding would match upstream. What >>> about the rest of the DTB? Got a pointer to it or want to publish it? >>> >>>> If we don't document this in vendor-prefixes.yaml, then the following >>>> warning >>>> is generated. >>>> >>>> WARNING: DT compatible string vendor "ltr" appears un-documented -- check >>>> ./Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.yaml 364: FILE: >>>> drivers/iio/light/ltrf216a.c:313: + { .compatible = "ltr,ltrf216a" }, >>>> >>>> >>>> Can you suggest us what would be the right way to fix this warning if not >>>> documenting >>>> in vendor-prefixes.yaml? >>> Fix the DT. We don't accept bindings simply because they are already >>> used in the field. If this was the only issue, it would be fine, but I >>> suspect it's the tip of the iceberg. >> >> Hi Rob, >> >> To make things more clear, following is the modalias info of the device. >> >> (B+)(root@linux iio:device0)# cat >> /sys/bus/i2c/devices/i2c-PRP0001\:01/modalias >> of:NltrfTCltr,ltrf216a >> >> It's a dt namespace on an ACPI based device. We used an of_device_id table >> to be able to probe the driver >> using the vendor prefix and compatible string. > Again, it's ACPI so I don't care. If someone cares about using DT > bindings in ACPI they can step up and help maintain them. It's not a DT > vs. ACPI thing, but just that I can only maintain so much and have to > draw the line somewhere. > >> But when we compile the driver, we get the following warning and hence we >> documented it in vendor-prefixes.yaml >> and also added a complete device tree file [Patch 3/3] just to get rid of >> the warning. In real life we are not using >> the device tree file at all. >> >> WARNING: DT compatible string vendor "ltr" appears un-documented -- check >> ./Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.yaml 364: FILE: >> drivers/iio/light/ltrf216a.c:313: + { .compatible = "ltr,ltrf216a" }, > So, is someone telling you to fix this?
So will it be right to just keep the warning and remove this patch? Is there a way you know to silent this warning?
Thanks, Shreeya Patel
> > >> There are many existing devices used by people which has the vendor prefix >> name as 'ltr' >> and it won't be possible to change that hence we are trying to upstream it. > There are millions if not billions of DT based devices using > undocumented bindings. If those used "ltr,ltrf216a", I wouldn't accept > it either. > > Rob >
| |