On 12/6/2023 3:09 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
On 05/12/2023 19:47, Markus Mayer wrote:Add versioned compatible strings for Broadcom DPFE. These take the form brcm,dpfe-cpu-v<N> where <N> is a number from 1 to 4. These API version related compatible strings are more specific than the catch-all "brcm,dpfe-cpu" and more generic than chip-specific compatible strings.None of this explains: Why? I don't see any point in this and commit does not explain.Signed-off-by: Markus Mayer <mmayer@xxxxxxxxxxxx> --- .../bindings/memory-controllers/brcm,dpfe-cpu.yaml | 8 +++++++- 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/brcm,dpfe-cpu.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/brcm,dpfe-cpu.yaml index 08cbdcddfead..6dffa7b62baf 100644 --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/brcm,dpfe-cpu.yaml +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/brcm,dpfe-cpu.yaml @@ -16,6 +16,11 @@ properties: - enum: - brcm,bcm7271-dpfe-cpu - brcm,bcm7268-dpfe-cpu + - enum: + - brcm,dpfe-cpu-v1 + - brcm,dpfe-cpu-v2 + - brcm,dpfe-cpu-v3 + - brcm,dpfe-cpu-v4No, that's just wrong. So you want to say bcm7271 is brcm,dpfe-cpu-v4?
No as the example shows it "speaks" API v1.I would be inclined to completely remove the chip specific compatible strings from the binding because they are not sufficient or descriptive enough to determine which API version is being spoken, since the firmware is unfortunately allowed to change major APIs (and the messaging format, because why not?) at a moments notice.
-- Florian
Attachment:
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
