Hi Sylwester,
On Fri, Aug 3, 2012 at 5:10 AM, Sylwester Nawrocki
<sylvester.nawrocki@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 08/02/2012 06:33 PM, Olof Johansson wrote:
>> 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.
After all this discussion, I can see two possibilities here.
1] If Kukjin Kim is sure about G-Scaler remains unchanged, across all
the exynos5 series SoCs,
It is fine to go with the compatible string "samsung,exynos5-gsc".
2] Otherwise in case of any doubts about G-Scaler is going to change,
It is safe to go with the compatible string specific to
current SoC i.e., "samsung,exynos5250-gsc".
If we all can agree on this, lets Kukjin Kim decide which string to
use as he has good knowledge about upcoming exynos5 series SoCs.
Regards,
Shaik Ameer Basha
>>
>> Your example is also false, since the strings would be in reverse
>> order (from specific to generic). That would look perfectly normal.
>
> You're right, but my intention was more to say that there would have been
> two entries in the driver's of_match_table, where "samsung,exynos5-gsc"
> wouldn't have obvious meaning. Devices within these SoCs tend to differ
> across part numbers and usually there is one common driver handling them.
>
> I can't tell for sure now there are differences, but I would have been
> surprised if there wouldn't.
>
>> So, bottom line: I agree in this particular instance, but I disagree
>> that it's a hard generic rule.
>
> Thanks, sorry if it sounded like I'm advocating it as a general rule.
> I'm no DT expert whatsoever, but in this particular case it just sounded
> messy to use only exynos5-gsc.
>
> --
> Regards,
> Sylwester
--
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
