Hi, On Friday 23 August 2013 02:20 AM, Stephen Warren wrote: > On 08/22/2013 02:31 AM, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote: >> The Palmas device contains only a USB VBUS-ID detector, so added a >> compatible type *ti,palmas-usb-vid*. Didn't remove the existing compatible >> types for backward compatibility. > >> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/extcon/extcon-palmas.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/extcon/extcon-palmas.txt > >> PALMAS USB COMPARATOR >> Required Properties: >> - - compatible : Should be "ti,palmas-usb" or "ti,twl6035-usb" >> + - compatible : Should be "ti,palmas-usb-vid". "ti,twl6035-usb" and >> + "ti,palmas-usb" is deprecated and is kept for backward compatibility. > > So this defines one new value and deprecates the two old values. yeah. > > Why isn't a new "ti,twl6035-usb-vid" entry useful? Don't you still need yeah, it should be added too. > SoC-specific compatible values so the driver can enable any SoC-specific > bug-fixes/workarounds later if needed? hmm.. Palmas is external to SoC. So not sure if adding SoC specific compatible values is such a good idea. Thanks Kishon -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-doc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
