linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: drm/bridge: ti-tmds181: Add TI TMDS181 and SN65DP159 bindings

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <2d694c9c-704e-4353-8b57-de83eb5a7f96@topic.nl>
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2025 10:26:15 +0200
From: Mike Looijmans <mike.looijmans@...ic.nl>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>, Conor Dooley <conor@...nel.org>
CC: dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, Andrzej Hajda <andrzej.hajda@...el.com>,
 Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, David Airlie <airlied@...il.com>,
 Jernej Skrabec <jernej.skrabec@...il.com>, Jonas Karlman <jonas@...boo.se>,
 Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
 Laurent Pinchart <Laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>,
 Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com>,
 Maxime Ripard <mripard@...nel.org>,
 Neil Armstrong <neil.armstrong@...aro.org>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
 Robert Foss <rfoss@...nel.org>, Simona Vetter <simona@...ll.ch>,
 Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@...e.de>, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: drm/bridge: ti-tmds181: Add TI TMDS181
 and SN65DP159 bindings

On 19-08-2025 09:51, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 19/08/2025 09:46, Mike Looijmans wrote:
>>>> +
>>>> +properties:
>>>> +  compatible:
>>>> +    enum:
>>>> +      - ti,tmds181
>>>> +      - ti,sn65dp159
>>> The driver contains:
>>> +	{ .compatible = "ti,tmds181", },
>>> +	{ .compatible = "ti,sn65dp159", },
>>> +	{}
>>> so why is a fallback compatible not suitable here?
>> I don't understand the question. The two are slightly different chips,
> Your driver says they are compatible. No one said the same, but compatible.
>
>> so it makes sense to describe that in the DT.
> Compatible devices should use fallback. There is plenty of examples (90%
> of all binding files?) including example-schema describing this.

Please help me out here, I'm happy to oblige, but I don't understand 
what you're asking.

To the best of my knowledge "fallback" compatible is when you write 
something like this in the device-tree:
    compatible = "st,m25p80", "jedec,spi-nor";
Which means that we can use the "jedec,spi-nor" driver if there's no 
specific match for "st,m25p80", correct?

I don't understand how that relates to your request, this is the first 
time I ever got this particular feedback. Looking at say the 
ti,sn65dsi83 driver, it does the same thing (supports the ti,sn65dsi83 
and ti,sn65dsi84).

Please explain or point me somewhere where I can find this?

>
>
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof


-- 
Mike Looijmans
System Expert

TOPIC Embedded Products B.V.
Materiaalweg 4, 5681 RJ Best
The Netherlands

T: +31 (0) 499 33 69 69
E: mike.looijmans@...ic.nl
W: www.topic.nl