On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 2:31 AM, Jerome Brunet <jbrunet@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, 2017-10-17 at 15:52 -0500, Rob Herring wrote: >> On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 09:39:13PM +0200, Jerome Brunet wrote: >> > On Fri, 2017-10-13 at 21:14 +0200, Martin Blumenstingl wrote: >> > > Hi Jerome, >> > > >> > > On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 5:24 PM, Jerome Brunet <jbrunet@xxxxxxxxxxxx> >> > > wrote: >> > > > The meson efuse driver seems to be compatible with more SoCs than >> > > > initially thought. Let's use the most generic compatible he have in >> > > > DT instead of the gxbb specific one >> > > > >> > > > Signed-off-by: Jerome Brunet <jbrunet@xxxxxxxxxxxx> >> > > > --- >> > > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/nvmem/amlogic-efuse.txt | 4 ++-- >> > > > drivers/nvmem/meson-efuse.c | 2 +- >> > > > 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) >> > > > >> > > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/nvmem/amlogic-efuse.txt >> > > > b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/nvmem/amlogic-efuse.txt >> > > > index fafd85bd67a6..0260524292fe 100644 >> > > > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/nvmem/amlogic-efuse.txt >> > > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/nvmem/amlogic-efuse.txt >> > > > @@ -1,7 +1,7 @@ >> > > > = Amlogic eFuse device tree bindings = >> > > > >> > > > Required properties: >> > > > -- compatible: should be "amlogic,meson-gxbb-efuse" >> > > > +- compatible: should be "amlogic,meson-gx-efuse" >> >> Same comment as for the firmware. >> >> > > >> > > have you checked with the devicetree maintainers how they want the >> > > documentation to look like in this case? >> > >> > You mean "Should we put every compatible existing (in DT) in the >> > documentation" >> > From what I've seen, at least in meson drivers, only the matched ones are >> > listed. >> > >> > That's a good question though. >> > We tend to put soc specific compatible "in case" we need them later on. >> > Should >> > we document those ? >> >> Absolutely. > > My understanding is that this documentation is the documentation of the bindings > used by the driver. No, the binding doc should be sufficient to validate the dts. > If I understand your point, we should document bindings (compatible in that > case) that are in fact not fact by the driver. This means that if someone refer > only to the documentation, he might be surprised by the result. How so? Rob -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
