Hi Laurent,
On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 3:01 PM, Laurent Pinchart
<laurent.pinchart@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tuesday, 26 September 2017 14:50:46 EEST Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 12:06 PM, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
>> > static const struct of_device_id rcar_fcp_of_match[] = {
>> > { .compatible = "renesas,fcpf", .data = (void *)RCAR_FCPF },
>> > { .compatible = "renesas,fcpv", .data = (void *)RCAR_FCPV },
>> > + { .compatible = "renesas,fcpvi", .data = (void *)RCAR_FCPVI },
>> > { },
>>
>> As you use "renesas,fcpv" as a fallback value, you may want to insert
>> the new and more specific "renesas,fvpci" handling above it, for clarity.
>
> Good point, I'll do that.
>
>> I believe it will return the RCAR_FCPVI match data anyway, based on
>> a higher match score for the more specific compatible value?
>
> I don't think this is related to a match score, but to the fact the compatible
> strings from DT are tried in the left to right direction.
JTR, see the use scores in __of_match_node() and __of_device_is_compatible().
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
