On 11/16/2017 07:43 AM, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
>
>> Am 16.11.2017 um 13:32 schrieb Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen@xxxxxx>:
>>
>> On 16/11/17 10:50, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
>>> The vendor name was "toppoly" but other panels and the vendor list
>>> have defined it as "tpo". So let's fix it in driver and bindings.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: H. Nikolaus Schaller <hns@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> ---
>>
>>
>>> -MODULE_ALIAS("spi:toppoly,td028ttec1");
>>> +MODULE_ALIAS("spi:tpo,td028ttec1");
>>
>> Doesn't this mean that the module won't load if you have old bindings?
>
> Hm.
>
> Well, I think it can load but doesn't automatically from DT strings which might
> be unexpected.
>
>> Can't we have two module aliases?
>
> I think we can. Just a random example:
> https://elixir.free-electrons.com/linux/latest/source/drivers/w1/slaves/w1_therm.c#L754
>
> So we should keep both.
Even better would be to drop both MODULE_ALIAS and let the
MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE macro define them for your from the SPI id table.
Although it doesn't look like this driver has an SPI id table, you
should probably add one, I be interested to see if this module is always
being matched through the "spi" or the "of" alias..
>
> Should I submit a new version?
>
> BR,
> Nikolaus
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
