Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] omapdrm: fix compatible string for td028ttec1

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 




On 11/16/2017 10:10 AM, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
> Hi Andrew,
> 
>> Am 16.11.2017 um 16:53 schrieb Andrew F. Davis <afd@xxxxxx>:
>>
>> On 11/16/2017 07:43 AM, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
>>>
>>>> Am 16.11.2017 um 13:32 schrieb Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen@xxxxxx>:
>>>>
>>>> On 16/11/17 10:50, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
>>>>> The vendor name was "toppoly" but other panels and the vendor list
>>>>> have defined it as "tpo". So let's fix it in driver and bindings.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: H. Nikolaus Schaller <hns@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>> ---
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> -MODULE_ALIAS("spi:toppoly,td028ttec1");
>>>>> +MODULE_ALIAS("spi:tpo,td028ttec1");
>>>>
>>>> Doesn't this mean that the module won't load if you have old bindings?
>>>
>>> Hm.
>>>
>>> Well, I think it can load but doesn't automatically from DT strings which might
>>> be unexpected.
>>>
>>>> Can't we have two module aliases?
>>>
>>> I think we can. Just a random example:
>>> https://elixir.free-electrons.com/linux/latest/source/drivers/w1/slaves/w1_therm.c#L754
>>>
>>> So we should keep both.
>>
>> Even better would be to drop both MODULE_ALIAS and let the
>> MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE macro define them for your from the SPI id table.
> 
> Why would that be better?
> 

MODULE_ALIAS is ugly, you already have a table (usually) of device names
that are supported by the driver, the module aliases should be generated
from that table. This also keeps supported device list in one place.

> As far as I see it will need more code and changes than adding one line of
> MODULE_ALIAS.
> 
>> Although it doesn't look like this driver has an SPI id table, you
>> should probably add one, I be interested to see if this module is always
>> being matched through the "spi" or the "of" alias..
> 
> Could you please propose how that code should look like, so that I can test?
> 

Sure,

start with
$ udevadm monitor
and see what string the kernel is looking for when trying to find a
module for this device.

If it is only ever looking for "of:toppoly,td028ttec1", then you can
drop the MODULE_ALIAS and be done as it was never getting used anyway.

What I expect though is "spi:toppoly,td028ttec1", in which case you
should add

static const struct spi_device_id td028ttec1_ids[] = {
	{ "toppoly,td028ttec1", 0 },
	{ "tpo,td028ttec1", 0},
	{ /* sentinel */ }
};
MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(spi, td028ttec1_ids);

link to it in the td028ttec1_spi_driver struct:
.id_table = td028ttec1_ids,

Then test again to see that the module still loads with the new and old
DT string.

Andrew

> BR and thanks,
> Nikolaus Schaller
> 
>>
>>>
>>> Should I submit a new version?
>>>
>>> BR,
>>> Nikolaus
>>>
>>> --
>>> 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
>>>
> 
> --
> 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
> 
--
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



[Index of Archives]     [Device Tree Compilter]     [Device Tree Spec]     [Linux Driver Backports]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux PCI Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]     [Yosemite Backpacking]


  Powered by Linux