[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <29f8c438-6e4a-4c1f-b68b-5f7d1bd0235e@kernel.org>
Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2024 09:20:25 +0200
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
To: Chris Packham <Chris.Packham@...iedtelesis.co.nz>
Cc: "lee@...nel.org" <lee@...nel.org>, "robh@...nel.org" <robh@...nel.org>,
"krzk+dt@...nel.org" <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
"conor+dt@...nel.org" <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
"tsbogend@...ha.franken.de" <tsbogend@...ha.franken.de>,
"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-mips@...r.kernel.org" <linux-mips@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 3/3] dt-bindings: mfd: Add more RTL9300 variants
On 24/09/2024 22:59, Chris Packham wrote:
>
> On 24/09/24 20:40, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 24, 2024 at 10:57:19AM +1200, Chris Packham wrote:
>>> Add the RTL9301, RTL9300B and RTL9303. These have the same SoC as the
>>> RTL9302C but differ in the Ethernet switch/SERDES arrangement.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Chris Packham <chris.packham@...iedtelesis.co.nz>
>>> ---
>>>
>>> Notes:
>>> Changes in v4:
>>> - New
>>>
>>> .../devicetree/bindings/mfd/realtek,rtl9302c-switch.yaml | 3 +++
>>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/realtek,rtl9302c-switch.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/realtek,rtl9302c-switch.yaml
>>> index 2d20dd07a7e9..a3ba6d9bacaa 100644
>>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/realtek,rtl9302c-switch.yaml
>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/realtek,rtl9302c-switch.yaml
>>> @@ -18,7 +18,10 @@ properties:
>>> compatible:
>>> items:
>>> - enum:
>>> + - realtek,rtl9301-switch
>>> + - realtek,rtl9302b-switch
>>> - realtek,rtl9302c-switch
>>> + - realtek,rtl9303-switch
>> This should be squashed. One logical change is to add a new binding for
>> entire family, not device-by-device.
> Yes I did consider that. The main thing that gave me pause for thought
> was the file naming thing. If I squash this should I switch back to the
> realtek,rtl9300-switch filename? I'll probably add the
> realtek,rtl9300-switch fallback as well (and add the chip specific
> compatibles for the i2c).
Splitting this per patch did not solve it - following your logic, file
should be renamed.
Choose name matching one compatible, e.g. the fallback. Aren't all these
devices compatible?
Best regards,
Krzysztof
Powered by blists - more mailing lists