On Thu, 2017-10-19 at 16:10 -0500, Rob Herring wrote: > 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? Compatible not matched. If the compatible is documented, I would expect "a driver" to match on it If we document every compatible used in DTS, some won't be matched. IMO, the current way (document the driver - the matched bindings) is easier and more predictable. > > 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
