Sylwester Nawrocki wrote: > > On 08/01/2012 09:48 AM, Thomas Abraham wrote: > > On 1 August 2012 12:10, Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> Shaik Ameer Basha wrote: > > > > [...] > > > >>> +* Samsung Exynos5 Gscaler device > >>> + > >>> +Gscaler is used for scaling and color space conversion on EXYNOS5 > SoCs. > >>> + > >>> +Required properties: > >>> +- compatible: should be "samsung,exynos5250-gsc" > >> > >> IMO, should be "samsung,exynos5-gsc" because upcoming EXYNOS5 SoCs can > use > >> same gscaler driver. > > In addition to the below explanation, perhaps it's obvious, but the driver > can claim compatibility with multiple devices, i.e. match with multiple > 'compatible' properties. > The name of exact model is 'gscaler' for EXYNOS5 SoCs not only for EXYNOS5250. So the driver which has been submitted is also 'exynos-gsc' not 'exynos5250-gsc'. Note that there is no gscaler on EXYNOS4 SoCs now, it can be either 'exynos5-gsc' or 'exynos-gsc'. In addition, since some peripherals/drivers can be used for multiple SoCs and actually it does, I'm still thinking the compatible should be represent its usage. I don't know why restricted name is much clearer. And if multiple 'compatible' is required, we can add it later. Thanks. Best regards, Kgene. -- Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Senior Engineer, SW Solution Development Team, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. > > > The compatible string should always be specific and it should clearly > > identify the type of the controller. If there are other variants of > > the GSC controller in previous of upcoming SoC's, then those > > controllers will have a different compatible value. > > > > This allows device drivers to know the type of the controller and > > handle the differences among them. And, the node in the dts/dtsi file > > should always claim compatibility to the base version of the > > controller that the platform supports. > > > > So the compatible value "samsung,exynos5250-gsc" is right one. If a > > new SoC in the Exynos5 family has the same GSC controller as that in > > Exynos5250 (no difference at all), then GSC device node in its dts > > file can continue to claim compatibility to Exynos5250 type. The > > "samsung,s3c2410-wdt is an example of this case which has been used on > > all Samsung SoC's . > > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
 |