On 30/11/2022 13:09, Daniel Golle wrote: > On Wed, Nov 02, 2022 at 04:43:35PM -0400, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >> On 31/10/2022 18:16, Daniel Golle wrote: >>> Add compatible string 'mediatek,mt7986-thermal' for V3 thermal unit >>> found in MT7981 and MT7986 SoCs. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Daniel Golle <daniel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>> --- >>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/thermal/mediatek-thermal.txt | 1 + >>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) >>> >>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/thermal/mediatek-thermal.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/thermal/mediatek-thermal.txt >>> index 5c7e7bdd029abf..efc16ab5b22b5d 100644 >>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/thermal/mediatek-thermal.txt >>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/thermal/mediatek-thermal.txt >>> @@ -13,6 +13,7 @@ Required properties: >>> - "mediatek,mt2701-thermal" : For MT2701 family of SoCs >>> - "mediatek,mt2712-thermal" : For MT2712 family of SoCs >>> - "mediatek,mt7622-thermal" : For MT7622 SoC >>> + - "mediatek,mt7986-thermal" : For MT7981 and MT7986 SoC >> >> Then recommended is to have specific compatible followed by fallback (so >> 7986 followed by 7981) > > I'm a bit confused about the order you are suggesting. It may seem > counter-intuitive, but MT7986 was released before MT7981, the thermal > units found in both SoCs seems to be exactly identical. > Or are you suggesting to list MT7981 first to maintain alphabetical > order? Because in terms of precedence, MT7986 has been there first, and > hence I'd list 7986 first, followed by 7981, ie. the opposite of the > order you were suggesting. > I have no clue which came first. Choose whatever is reasonable. Best regards, Krzysztof
