On Fri, Aug 13, 2021 at 10:47 AM Sa, Nuno <Nuno.Sa@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > From: Rob Herring <robh+dt@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Sent: Thursday, August 12, 2021 5:11 PM > > On Thu, Aug 12, 2021 at 3:14 AM Sa, Nuno <Nuno.Sa@xxxxxxxxxx> > > wrote: ... > > > Could you give your input on this one? > > > > There's no context, but I'm assuming this is in channel nodes. Keep > > Sorry about that. Your assumption is correct, the binding is for a channel > node [1]. The driver just get's it as 'num' [2] which is not consistent. > Naively, I just though changing the driver to use reg would be enough > but Andy nicely raised the question of someone being already relying > on 'num'... > > > the binding 'reg' and make the driver support both if needed. > > Considering the author of the binding also changed the binding from > > num to reg shortly after adding the binding, I don't think 'num' > > support is needed. If someone used 'num' and didn't run validation, > > well, that's their problem. > > > > So I guess the solution here is just to change the driver to support both > reg and num. As far as I got Rob's answer, if the binding never had the 'num', dropping it from the driver is what we want now (actually your original patch) and users, who are 'too much clever' :-) should have had run validation for their DTs before production. Taking this into account, I'm fine with the patch (but update a commit message to summarize this discussion) Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxx> -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
