On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 03:25:15PM +0530, Jassi Brar wrote: > On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 12:23 PM, Oleksij Rempel > <o.rempel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > This are currently tested SoCs with imx-mailbox driver. > > > > Signed-off-by: Oleksij Rempel <o.rempel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mailbox/fsl,mu.txt | 2 +- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mailbox/fsl,mu.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mailbox/fsl,mu.txt > > index 113d6ab931ef..5616d2afca45 100644 > > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mailbox/fsl,mu.txt > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mailbox/fsl,mu.txt > > @@ -18,7 +18,7 @@ Messaging Unit Device Node: > > Required properties: > > ------------------- > > - compatible : should be "fsl,<chip>-mu", the supported chips include > > - imx8qxp, imx8qm. > > + imx6sx, imx7s, imx8qxp, imx8qm. > > > This is not scalable. Do we add every new SoC that contains the same controller? > I think the controller name, if it has one or create a new one like > 'imx-mu', should be used here. > So, > compatible : should be "fsl,imx-mu" No, for all the reasons already correctly explained in this thread. > BTW, the driver doesn't even probe anything other than > 'fsl,imx6sx-mu', unlike what the binding says. This aspect should be documented here though. The documentation should clearly define what are valid combinations of compatibles. 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
