Markuss, On Sat Dec 9, 2023 at 11:58 AM CET, Conor Dooley wrote: > On Sat, Dec 09, 2023 at 10:05:27AM +0100, Karel Balej wrote: > > On Mon Dec 4, 2023 at 1:52 PM CET, Conor Dooley wrote: > > > On Mon, Dec 04, 2023 at 02:40:44PM +0200, Markuss Broks wrote: > > > > On 12/3/23 13:20, Conor Dooley wrote: > > > > > On Sat, Dec 02, 2023 at 01:48:33PM +0100, Karel Balej wrote: > > > > > > From: Markuss Broks <markuss.broks@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > > > > > > > Imagis IST3038B is a variant (firmware?) of Imagis IST3038 IC, > > > > > > add the compatible for it to the IST3038C bindings. > > > > > This one is better, but would be well served by mentioning what > > > > > specifically is different (register addresses or firmware commands?) > > > > > > > > I don't think anyone knows this other than Imagis itself. I would guess it's > > > > different hardware, since register addresses are indeed different, but on > > > > the other hand, there is a possibility that firmware on the MCU could be > > > > responding to those commands. I suppose "... IST3038B is a hardware variant > > > > of ... IST3038" would be more correct. > > > > > > Only Imagis might know the specifics, but you (plural) have made driver > > > changes so you know what is different in terms of the programming model. > > > I'm just asking for you to mention how the programming model varies in > > > the commit message. Otherwise I can't know whether you should have added > > > a fallback compatible, without going and reading your driver change. The > > > commit message for the bindings should stand on its own merit in that > > > regard. > > > "Variant" alone does not suffice, as many variants of devices have a > > > compatible programming model, be that for a subset of features or > > > complete compatibility. > > > > > > > The reason why I think it could be firmware-defined is because we have a lot > > > > of variants (30xxA, 30xxB, 30xxC, plain 30xx), and the numbers usually mean > > > > feature level/completeness, e.g. some don't support the touch pressure or > > > > touchkeys, and we don't know what A/B/C/none means. > > > > > > Ultimately whether it is due to firmware or the hardware isn't > > > particular important, just mention what is incompatibly different. > > > > I propose to update the commit description as such: > > > > Imagis IST3038B is a variant (firmware?) of Imagis IST3038 IC > > differing from IST3038C in its register interface. Add the > > compatible for it to the IST3038C bindings. is this change OK with you? > > > SGTM. You can add > Acked-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > with that commit message update. > > Thanks, > Conor. Kind regards, K. B.
