[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <f6bb5759-453b-fa05-c6e1-f1d57abeaffa@linaro.org>
Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2022 09:34:52 +0100
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
To: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org>
Cc: Luca Weiss <luca@...tu.xyz>, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
~postmarketos/upstreaming@...ts.sr.ht, phone-devel@...r.kernel.org,
Andy Gross <agross@...nel.org>,
Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: arm: qcom: Document oneplus,bacon device
On 27/11/2022 22:43, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> On Sun, 27 Nov 2022 at 23:30, Krzysztof Kozlowski
> <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org> wrote:
>>
>> On 27/11/2022 22:25, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
>>> On Sun, 27 Nov 2022 at 20:19, Luca Weiss <luca@...tu.xyz> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Document the OnePlus One ("bacon") which is a smartphone based on the
>>>> Snapdragon 801 SoC.
>>>>
>>>> Also allow msm8974 devices to use qcom,msm-id and qcom,board-id.
>>>
>>> The patch itself is good. However it raised a broader question for me.
>>> Up to now all msm8974pro devices use qcom,msm8974 as a top-level
>>> compatibility string. Should it be changed to use pro-specific one
>>> (e.g. qcom,msm8974pro)?
>>
>> Yes, makes sense.
>
> Would you make the patch?
I do not plan to. I don't know which ones are Pro which aren't.
Best regards,
Krzysztof
Powered by blists - more mailing lists