On Sun, Mar 20, 2022 at 7:56 PM Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, Mar 18, 2022 at 02:55:08AM +0530, Kuldeep Singh wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 17, 2022 at 08:25:12PM +0000, Robin Murphy wrote: > > > On 2022-03-17 19:15, Kuldeep Singh wrote: > > > > Renesas RZ/N1D platform uses compatible "arm,cortex-a7-timer" in > > > > conjugation with "arm,armv7-timer". Since, initial entry is not > > > > documented, it start raising dtbs_check warnings. I hadn't seen this thread, but I had already removed the unneeded compatible value locally, and was just waiting for the merge window and holidays to end for sending the patch... > > > > > > > > ['arm,cortex-a7-timer', 'arm,armv7-timer'] is too long > > > > 'arm,cortex-a7-timer' is not one of ['arm,armv7-timer', 'arm,armv8-timer'] > > > > 'arm,cortex-a7-timer' is not one of ['arm,cortex-a15-timer'] > > > > > > > > Document this compatible to address it. The motivation to add this > > > > change is taken from an already existing entry "arm,cortex-a15-timer". > > > > Please note, this will not hurt any arch timer users. > > > > > > Eh, if it's never been documented or supported, I say just get rid of it. > > > The arch timer interface is by definition part of a CPU, and we can tell > > > what the CPU is by reading its ID registers. Indeed that's how the driver > > > handles the non-zero number of CPU-specific errata that already exist - we > > > don't need compatibles for that. > > > > > > In some ways it might have been nice to have *SoC-specific* compatibles > > > given the difficulty some integrators seem to have had in wiring up a stable > > > count *to* the interface, but it's not like they could be magically added to > > > already-deployed DTs after a bug is discovered, and nor could we have > > > mandated them from day 1 just in case and subsequently maintained a binding > > > that is just an ever-growing list of every SoC. Oh well. > > > > Robin, A similar discussion was already done on v1 thread. Please see > > below for details: > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-devicetree/20220317065925.GA9158@9a2d8922b8f1/ > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-devicetree/726bde76-d792-febf-d364-6eedeb748c3b@xxxxxxxxxxxxx/ > > > > And final outcome of discussion turns out to add this compatible string. > > I agree with Robin on dropping. More specific here is not useful. If > we're going to add some cores, then we should add every core > implementation. ... So consider it gone. https://lore.kernel.org/r/a8e0cf00a983b4c539cdb1cfad5cc6b10b423c5b.1649680220.git.geert+renesas@xxxxxxxxx/ Gr{oetje,eeting}s, Geert -- Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that. -- Linus Torvalds
