On Sep 27 2022 13:42, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 26/09/2022 18:59, Guru Das Srinagesh wrote: > > On Sep 24 2022 10:17, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > >> On 24/09/2022 02:09, Guru Das Srinagesh wrote: > >>> On Sep 21 2022 20:43, Konrad Dybcio wrote: > >>>> Does it? I did not define this compatible in the driver, so it does > >>>> not consume any clocks. > >>> > >>> The bindings should describe only those compatibles that the driver supports - > >>> that is, both the driver and its bindings should be in sync. > >> > >> That's not entirely true. Bindings describe the hardware in the most > >> complete way we can. Not the driver. Whether driver supports something > >> or not, is not relevant here, except that we don't want to document > >> non-existing things or stuff out of tree. > > > > Is this only applicable to compatibles or device tree properties in general? > > This applies to everything. > > > > >>> > >>> Could you please update the driver with this compatible as well? Let's not > >>> merge this change without that first. > >> > >> This could be even merged without change in the driver. However it's not > >> the case here as driver already supports it, so your request is fulfilled. > > > > My concern is that if somebody specifies a compatible/device tree property that > > the driver doesn't support, their expectations from adding that change will not > > be met. In addition to having the bindings describe HW in full, I think the > > driver should also be in sync with it for this reason. > > As Rob answered, it might be difficult to keep all drivers in all > operating systems, bootloaders and firmware components to be in sync. :) Ack.
