[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <aYm3GBNKalUWloA2@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2026 12:29:44 +0200
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...el.com>
To: Oleksij Rempel <o.rempel@...gutronix.de>
Cc: Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, kernel@...gutronix.de,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-iio@...r.kernel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, Andy Shevchenko <andy@...nel.org>,
David Lechner <dlechner@...libre.com>,
Nuno Sá <nuno.sa@...log.com>,
David Jander <david@...tonic.nl>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 06/13] iio: dac: ds4424: use device match data for
chip info
On Mon, Feb 09, 2026 at 10:22:13AM +0100, Oleksij Rempel wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 06, 2026 at 11:59:50AM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 06, 2026 at 08:57:07AM +0100, Oleksij Rempel wrote:
> > > On Thu, Feb 05, 2026 at 08:43:25PM +0000, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> > > > On Tue, 3 Feb 2026 16:56:00 +0200
> > > > Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...el.com> wrote:
...
> > > > > Just do not introduce that change (change of the ->name field) in the original
> > > > > patch, in that case no revert churn would be needed.
> > > > >
> > > > I think this got dealt with in discussion of next version but
> > > > safest route is just have an extra copy of the name in the
> > > > chip_info structure. Then we know it's stable against different
> > > > firmware types etc.
> > >
> > > Something like this?
> >
> > Yes, but make it in the patch that introduces DT support.
>
> Hm, I'm not sure what do you mean. There is no patch which "introduces
> DT support" in this series. Do you mean, this one:
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260204140045.390677-7-o.rempel@pengutronix.de/
Yes, I meant that one.
> Or should it be better a separate patch?
Perhaps just after the above mentioned one. Either works for me.
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists