On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 1:53 PM, Wolfram Sang <wsa@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> There are three compatible strings defined for the ADXL345 and ADXL346 in
>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/trivial-devices.txt: "adi,adxl345",
>> "adi,adxl346", "adi,adxl34x". Given that the last one is a fallback for the
>> first two I don't see a need to add the specific compatible strings to the
>> driver for now. If a new totally incompatible chip named ADXL347 comes out we
>> will need a new driver which won't be allowed to use the "adi,adxl34x"
>> compatible string.
>
> Been there, got bitten. We only found out too late, because one driver
> was in i2c and the other in GPIO (or LED even?), both using "953x" :(
Yep, pca953x => leds-pca953x
>> An option would be to remove "adi,adxl34x" from
>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/trivial-devices.txt, in which case the
>> driver should match explicitly on "adi,adxl345" and "adi,adxl346". That might
>> clash with the DT ABI stability requirements though.
>
> I do prefer this:
>
> 1) add specific compatible values to the driver. We do those updates for
> new devices all the time
> 2) also add "34x" as a compatible but mark it as deprecateed
> 3) delete "34x" from trivial devices
>
> Everyone OK with that?
Sounds fine to me. Thanks!
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-i2c" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
