On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 12:03 PM, Sylwester Nawrocki <sylvester.nawrocki@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > It wouldn't be clear what specific SoCs the "samsung,exynos5-gsc" compatible > string applies to, would it ? I believe there are already minor differences > in GScaler parameters on currently available exynos5 SoC. The variant data > structures are used to handle this and the compatible string determines which > variant data structure is selected during driver's initialization. > If you use a wildcard 'compatible' string this won't be possible any more. > > Also it would look odd IMO to have two compatible strings like: > compatible = "samsung,exynos5-gsc", "samsung,exynos5400-gsc"; In this particular case, since you're saying that there are subtle differences between different part numbers, I'm guessing there's good reason to go specific, but in general there's no need to avoid exynos5-gsc. Your example is also false, since the strings would be in reverse order (from specific to generic). That would look perfectly normal. So, bottom line: I agree in this particular instance, but I disagree that it's a hard generic rule. -Olof -- 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
 |