Re: [PATCH v1 1/3] dt-bindings: mmc: Drop unused properties

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

 




On 2023/9/2 1:43, Conor Dooley wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 01, 2023 at 06:20:38PM +0100, Jessica Clarke wrote:
>> On 1 Sep 2023, at 16:42, Conor Dooley <conor@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > 
>> > On Fri, Sep 01, 2023 at 10:33:13AM +0800, William Qiu wrote:
>> >> 
>> >> 
>> >> On 2023/8/30 16:34, Conor Dooley wrote:
>> >>> On Wed, Aug 30, 2023 at 09:29:20AM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> >>>> On 30/08/2023 08:50, Conor Dooley wrote:
>> >>>>> On Wed, Aug 30, 2023 at 11:18:44AM +0800, William Qiu wrote:
>> >>>>>> Due to the change of tuning implementation, it's no longer necessary to
>> >>>>>> use the "starfive,sysreg" property in dts, so drop the relevant
>> >>>>>> description in dt-bindings here.
>> >>>>> 
>> >>>>> How does changing your software implantation invalidate a description of
>> >>>>> the hardware?
>> >>>>> 
>> >>>> 
>> >>>> Which is kind of proof that this syscon was just to substitute
>> >>>> incomplete hardware description (e.g. missing clocks and phys). We
>> >>>> should have rejected it. Just like we should reject them in the future.
>> >>> 
>> >>> :s I dunno what to do with this... I'm inclined to say not to remove it
>> >>> from the binding or dts at all & only change the software.
>> >>> 
>> >>>> There are just few cases where syscon is reasonable. All others is just
>> >>>> laziness. It's not only starfivetech, of course. Several other
>> >>>> contributors do the same.
>> >>> 
>> >>> I'm not sure if laziness is fair, lack of understanding is usually more
>> >>> likely.
>> >> 
>> >> For this, I tend to keep it in binding, but remove it from required. Because
>> >> we only modify the tuning implementation, it doesn't mean that this property
>> >> need to be removed, it's just no longer be the required one.
>> > 
>> > Please only remove it from required if the current driver doesn't break
>> > if the regmap is removed.
>> 
>> Either way please make sure the documentation clearly states “never use
>> this, if you’re using it you’re doing it wrong, this only exists
>> because it was wrongly used in the past”. Otherwise people writing
>> drivers for other OSes will probably use it too thinking they need to.
> 
> Maybe we should just delete it if the impact is going to be negligible,
> sounds like you're not using it in FreeBSD, which was part of what I was
> worried about. Guess it depends on what Emil & the distro heads think.
Hi Conor,

After discussing it with our colleagues, we decided that deleting it was the best
course of action. Since there will no longer be a related implementation of
"starfive,sysreg" in future drivers, even if the dt-binding is described, it will
be "never use", so I think it should be deleted.

What do you think?

Best regards,
William



[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