On 10/01/2023 20:32, krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx wrote: > > Then I am not sure if we want to support such devices mainline. It is not only > anonymity but simply not following standards and practices. > What's more there is no guarantee what this device is. If there is no known > manufacturer, anytime another device from anyone can claim it is also uf896. > IOW, what guarantees you have that other person who has something looking > like "uf896" actually has something the same as you and can use your DTB? There is a label printed (i.e. ufi001c or uf896 or something else but not getting mainlined now) on the board, different models have different labels(and different board design). And currently I know all ufi001c(even some other models) shares the same device tree, as a downstream device tree has been tested by thousands of people. I'm not familiar with uf896 as it is owned by Nikita Travkin and tested by him. The device sells very well and many people will benefit from mainlining.
