On Thu, Feb 27, 2025 at 11:15:51AM +0800, Peng Fan wrote: > On Wed, Feb 26, 2025 at 05:19:53PM +0000, Sudeep Holla wrote: > >On Wed, Feb 26, 2025 at 10:09:45AM -0600, Rob Herring wrote: > >> On Wed, Feb 26, 2025 at 05:44:56PM +0800, Peng Fan (OSS) wrote: > >> > Quote Sudeep's reply" > >> > I am not blocking you. What I mentioned is I don't agree that DT can be used > >> > to resolve this issue, but I don't have time or alternate solution ATM. So > >> > if you propose DT based solution and the maintainers agree for the proposed > >> > bindings I will take a look and help you to make that work. But I will raise > >> > any objections I may have if the proposal has issues mainly around the > >> > compatibility and ease of maintenance. > >> > " > >> > >> This all looks to me like SCMI has failed to provide common interfaces. > >> > > > >We can look into this if having such common interface can solve this problem. > > > >> I'm indifferent. If everyone involved thinks adding compatibles will > >> solve whatever the issues are, then it's going to be fine with me > >> (other than the issue above). It doesn't seem like you have that, so I > >> don't know that I'd keep going down this path. > > > >Sorry if I was ambiguous with my stance as quoted above. For me, 2 devices > >pointing to the same node seems implementation issue rather than fixing/ > >working around by extending DT bindings like this $subject patch is > >attempting. > > > >If you disagree with that and think 2 devices in the kernel shouldn't > >point to the same device tree node, then yes I see this is right approach > >to take. ATM I don't know which is correct and what are other developer's > >include DT maintainer opinion on this. I just didn't like the way Peng > >was trying to solve it with some block/allow list which wouldn't have > >fixed the issue or just created new ones. > > With compatible string, no need block/allow list anymore I think. > I completely understand that, I was referring to your earlier alternative solution to this $subject approach. Sorry if that was evidently clear. -- Regards, Sudeep
