On Tue, Sep 26, 2023 at 11:20:01AM +0100, Conor Dooley wrote: > On Tue, Sep 26, 2023 at 11:04:26AM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 26, 2023 at 10:26 AM Conor Dooley <conor@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > + - items: > > > > + - const: linksys,wrv54g > > > > + - const: gemtek,gtwx5715 > > > > + - const: intel,ixp42x > > > > > > One question, not so much about this particular case, but is there no > > > "standalone" version of the gtwx5715 sold by gemtek? Asking as I don't > > > see it in the enum above. The description sounds like it is both a > > > product in its own right & sold rebadged. > > > > Yeah this one is a special headache. It's two different brandings > > of the same router. The Linksys version can still be bought new > > from Amazon: > > https://www.amazon.com/Cisco-Linksys-WRV54G-Wireless-G-VPN-Router/dp/B0000AR8Z1 > > > > I'm leaning toward listing them as two different devices instead > > of what we have now, which is > > > > compatible = "linksys,wrv54g", "gemtek,gtwx5715", "intel,ixp42x"; > > > > We can just decide that one of them is the canon device, I guess > > Linksys, and the other we can just use that device tree, or we > > create a device tree that includes the former and just override > > the compatible. > > > > I don't really know what to do here. > > Ahh, you were intentionally doing this so that for both devices you > would list all 3 compatibles? I had it in my head that the OEM device > would have 2 compatibles & the rebadged one would have 3. > I'd probably be slightly in favour of your second option, since you'd > likely want to set the model too. I suppose it's the decision of the > maintainer for the platforms, which IIRC is you, as given the devices > differ only by the badge... I would do a combination. Use the same compatible, but different "model" if you want to override it. Rob
