lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2023]   [Mar]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    SubjectRe: [RFC PATCH 07/16] dt-bindings: pinctrl: ralink: add new compatible strings
    From
    On 01/03/2023 09:15, Arınç ÜNAL wrote:
    > On 1.03.2023 05:44, Rob Herring wrote:
    >> On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 07:46:36PM +0300, Arınç ÜNAL wrote:
    >>> On 27/02/2023 20:33, Rob Herring wrote:
    >>>> On Wed, Feb 22, 2023 at 09:39:23PM +0300, arinc9.unal@gmail.com wrote:
    >>>>> From: Arınç ÜNAL <arinc.unal@arinc9.com>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Add the ralink,rt2880-pinmux compatible string. It had been removed from
    >>>>> the driver which broke the ABI.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Add the mediatek compatible strings. Change the compatible string on the
    >>>>> examples with the mediatek compatible strings.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Signed-off-by: Arınç ÜNAL <arinc.unal@arinc9.com>
    >>>>> ---
    >>>>> .../devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/ralink,mt7620-pinctrl.yaml | 7 +++++--
    >>>>> .../devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/ralink,mt7621-pinctrl.yaml | 7 +++++--
    >>>>> .../devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/ralink,rt2880-pinctrl.yaml | 7 +++++--
    >>>>> .../devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/ralink,rt305x-pinctrl.yaml | 7 +++++--
    >>>>> .../devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/ralink,rt3883-pinctrl.yaml | 7 +++++--
    >>>>> 5 files changed, 25 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
    >>>>>
    >>>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/ralink,mt7620-pinctrl.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/ralink,mt7620-pinctrl.yaml
    >>>>> index 1e63ea34146a..531b5f616c3d 100644
    >>>>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/ralink,mt7620-pinctrl.yaml
    >>>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/ralink,mt7620-pinctrl.yaml
    >>>>> @@ -17,7 +17,10 @@ description:
    >>>>> properties:
    >>>>> compatible:
    >>>>> - const: ralink,mt7620-pinctrl
    >>>>> + enum:
    >>>>> + - mediatek,mt7620-pinctrl
    >>>>> + - ralink,mt7620-pinctrl
    >>>>
    >>>> We don't update compatible strings based on acquistions nor marketing
    >>>> whims. If you want to use 'mediatek' for new things, then fine.
    >>>
    >>> Understood. Only the SoCs with rtXXXX were rebranded, the mtXXXX SoCs share
    >>> the same architecture from Ralink, so they were incorrectly called Ralink
    >>> SoCs.
    >>>
    >>> I can remove the new strings from Ralink SoCs and add them only for MediaTek
    >>> SoCs. Or you could make an exception for this one, regarding the situation.
    >>> Whatever you think is best.
    >>
    >> I'm not in a position to make an exception as I know little about this
    >> platform. Carrying both strings is a NAK. Either you (and everyone using
    >> these platforms) care about the ABI and are stuck with the "wrong"
    >> string. In the end, they are just unique identifiers. Or you don't care
    >> and break the ABI and rename everything. If you do that, do just that in
    >> your patches and make it crystal clear in the commit msg that is your
    >> intention and why that is okay.
    >
    > Ralink had their MIPS SoCs pre-acquisition, RT2880, etc. MediaTek
    > introduced new SoCs post-acquisition, MT7620, MT7621, MT7628, and
    > MT7688, utilising the same platform from Ralink, sharing the same
    > architecture code, pinctrl core driver, etc.
    >
    > I don't intend to break the ABI at all. On the contrary, I fix it where
    > possible.
    >
    > If I understand correctly, from this conversation and what Krzysztof
    > said, all strings must be kept on the schemas so I can do what I said on
    > the composed mail. Only match the pin muxing information on the strings
    > that won't match multiple pin muxing information from other schemas.
    >
    > This way we don't break the ABI, introduce new compatible strings while
    > keeping the remaining ones, and make schemas match correctly.
    >
    > Let me know if this is acceptable to you.

    If by "introduce new compatible strings" you mean duplicate compatibles
    to fix the ralink->mediatek, then you ignored entire email from Rob -
    this and previous. We don't do this. Leave them as is.

    If you meant something else, explain more...

    Best regards,
    Krzysztof

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2023-03-27 00:41    [W:6.147 / U:0.008 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site