On Thu, Sep 21, 2023 at 7:01 PM Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, Sep 21, 2023 at 6:01 PM Michael Walle <michael@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > >> We won't break compatibility with older DTBs if we use a list of > > >> compatibles. First the vendor specific one which will use some quirks, > > >> and if that's not available, have as second the generic jedec,spi-nor > > >> to > > >> fallback to. > > > > > > Sure, you should use a list. > > > > > > But the current recommended practice is to not have a list, > > > but just "jedec,spi-nor" (using a list with a new FLASH part name > > > causes checkpatch and dtbs_check warnings). Hence if you follow that > > > recommendation, you will run into compatibility issues with older DTBs > > > when you discover the quirk later, and decide to add it to the list. > > > > The SPI NOR flashes should be auto discoverable. Why do you need a > > compatible string? Quirks can be added to the flash_info database. > > This assumes you don't need the quirk before you can identify the part. > I'm not sure that is always the case. Reminder where this is apparently not the case: https://lore.kernel.org/r/OS0PR01MB5922A4F16DE8923373AA5DD886F7A@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ 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
