[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <655b8897-b3f6-4a49-95df-fc07c520c5c6@kernel.org>
Date: Fri, 2 Jan 2026 12:42:49 +0100
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
To: "Maulik Shah (mkshah)" <maulik.shah@....qualcomm.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>, Conor Dooley
<conor+dt@...nel.org>, Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@....qualcomm.com>,
Konrad Dybcio <konradybcio@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: interrupt-controller: qcom,pdc: Document
x1p42100 PDC
On 02/01/2026 05:23, Maulik Shah (mkshah) wrote:
>> Your are describing wrong bug being fixed... or actually not a bug.
>> Every SoC should have dedicated compatible (see writing bindings) and
>> missing compatible is not a bug.
>
> The X1P42100 SoC today shares most of the devices with X1E80100 SoC as is,
> with X1E80100 as bigger brother.
>
> Adding new compatible for X1P42100 PDC to avoid applying the S/W workaround
> for the H/W bug of X1E80100 should be as per writing bindings which says,
> - DO add new compatibles in case there are new features or bugs.
So you just repeated what I said. We both agree. It's not a bug.
>
> Adding The Fixes: tag for binding will also help when patch-2 of the series
> gets backported, the binding change also gets automatically picked up.
Does not matter. You do not add fake Fixes tag for that reason.
Best regards,
Krzysztof
Powered by blists - more mailing lists