On Fri, Mar 08, 2024 at 03:08:12PM +0100, Julien Massot wrote: > On 3/7/24 20:21, Conor Dooley wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 05, 2024 at 04:26:06PM +0100, Julien Massot wrote: > > > Add DT bindings for Maxim MAX96714 GMSL2 Deserializer. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Julien Massot <julien.massot@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > --- > > > Change since v3: > > > - Renamed file to maxim,max96714.yaml dropped the 'f' suffix > > > > Why? The filename should match the compatible, which /does/ have an f. > All the work has been done on MAX96714F variant of this Maxim GMSL2 > deserializer. > The driver and the binding remain suitable for all variants of this chipset, > since they share the same > register mapping, similar features etc.. > > MAX96714 exists in different variant: MAX96714 / MAX96714F / MAX96714K that > will be easy > to add support for this binding and driver later. Either document the non-f version if it really is that similar, using all of the same properties, or name the file after the version you've actually documented. I don't see why this particular case should be given an exception to how bindings are named. What is the actual difference between the f and non f versions? Is it visible to software? > The MAX96714 name looks the most suitable. > Please have a look at this discussion on the V3 version > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/ZdXYpc2csVnhtZH9@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
