Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 21 Jul 2022 09:36:53 +0200 | Subject | Re: [RESEND PATCH 2/9] dt-bindings: arm64: bcmbca: Update BCM4908 description | From | Krzysztof Kozlowski <> |
| |
On 21/07/2022 09:13, Rafał Miłecki wrote: >> That's better argument. But what's the benefit of adding generic >> compatible? Devices cannot bind to it (it is too generic). Does it >> describe the device anyhow? Imagine someone adding compatible >> "brcm,all-soc-of-broadcom" - does it make any sense? > > OK, I see it now. I can't think of any case of handling all devices > covered with suc a wide brcm,bcmbca binding.
Maybe there is some common part of a SoC which that generic compatible would express?
Most archs don't use soc-wide generic compatible, because of reasons I mentioned - no actual benefits for anyone from such compatible.
But there are exceptions. I fouun socfpga and apple. The apple sounds as mistake to me, because the generic "apple,arm-platform" compatible looks like covering all possible Apple ARM platforms. I think Apple ARM designs in 20 years will not be compatible at all with current design, so such broad compatible is not useful... but that's only my opinion.
> > This leads me to another question if we should actually totally drop > brcm,bcmbca from other SoCs bindings, see linux-next's > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/bcm/brcm,bcmbca.yaml
This would be tricky as it was already accepted, unless all sit in linux-next and did not make to v5.19-rc1.
Best regards, Krzysztof
| |