[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4666f8e9-d19e-45bd-be9c-a7f111168d66@kernel.org>
Date: Sat, 4 Jan 2025 15:43:37 +0100
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
To: "Peng Fan (OSS)" <peng.fan@....nxp.com>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>, Conor Dooley
<conor+dt@...nel.org>, Shawn Guo <shawnguo@...nel.org>,
Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>,
Pengutronix Kernel Team <kernel@...gutronix.de>,
Fabio Estevam <festevam@...il.com>
Cc: devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
imx@...ts.linux.dev, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
Peng Fan <peng.fan@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: arm: fsl: Update i.MX95 compatible
On 04/01/2025 13:13, Peng Fan (OSS) wrote:
> From: Peng Fan <peng.fan@....com>
>
> i.MX95 features a System Controller and SCMI Spec 3.2 compatible
> firmware System Manager(SM) runs on the controller.
> Add "fsl,imx-sm" compatible string as fallback for "fsl,imx95" to
> indicate it is compatible with i.MX System Manager.
I see little value in generic compatible like that. All these are
aarch64 so why not adding that compatible?
How this generic compatible would be used?
And by what exactly?
All this must be explained in the commit msg.
Best regards,
Krzysztof
Powered by blists - more mailing lists