[PATCH v2] dt-bindings: touchscreen: silead gsl1680: Document all compatibles
From: dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com (Dmitry Torokhov)
Date: 2016-08-21 22:11:52
Also in:
linux-devicetree, linux-input
On August 20, 2016 1:25:48 PM PDT, Rob Herring [off-list ref] wrote:
On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 3:39 PM, Dmitry Torokhov [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 02:48:52PM -0500, Rob Herring wrote:quoted
On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 2:30 PM, Dmitry Torokhov [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 10:59:00AM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote:quoted
The silead gsl1680 driver / binding supports a whole series ofdevices,quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
list the compatibles for all of them in the binding. Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <redacted> --- Changes in v2: -Drop the "silead,mssl1680" compatible thing, the "mssl1680" nameis anquoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
ACPI thing and does not belong in the dt bindings --- .../devicetree/bindings/input/touchscreen/silead_gsl1680.txt| 4 ++++quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) diff --gita/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/input/touchscreen/silead_gsl1680.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/input/touchscreen/silead_gsl1680.txtquoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
index b0eca54..ad7f41a 100644 ---a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/input/touchscreen/silead_gsl1680.txtquoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
+++b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/input/touchscreen/silead_gsl1680.txtquoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
@@ -2,6 +2,10 @@ Required properties: - compatible : "silead,gsl1680" + or: "silead,gsl1688" + or: "silead,gsl3670" + or: "silead,gsl3675" + or: "silead,gsl3692"Hmm, why do we need to document all compatible strings? We usuallyhavequoted
quoted
quoted
only least common denominator in drievr, and device tree usesform:quoted
quoted
quoted
compatible = "silead,<exact model>", "silead,gsl1680"; Rob?Because we require them in dts files even if the OS only uses thefallback.quoted
So how exactly should it be documented? I mean if there were morethan 1quoted
OS they might have been using different fallbacks. How do we decide which entry should be "true" fallback?It shouldn't matter which one an OS uses. There's typically only the specific one and then a generic or 1st compatible chip one.
When you are saying "first compatible chip" do you mean first as it was created by the vendor or first that was added to a given os? Because we quite often have no idea what the first compatible chip in a series was and start with whatever the first submitter of a driver used in their product.
This is exactly why they need to be documented (and in a single place, looking at you u-boot), so there is no confusion as to what compatibles are allowed/valid for each platform.
What do you mean when you say platform? We have uboot, core boot, Linux, free BSD, in whatever combinations. How do we make sure we all use the same fallback? Thanks. -- Dmitry