Re: SHMobile Compatibility String Inconsistencies

On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 01:31:31PM +0200, Laurent Pinchart wrote:

Hi David,

On Friday 23 August 2013 12:11:11 David Gibson wrote:

quoted

On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 02:46:40PM +0900, Simon Horman wrote:

quoted

Hi Laurent, Hi Guennadi, Hi All,

Olof has brought to my attention that there is some inconsistency
in the way that compatibility strings for SHMobile are named and he
has asked us to clean things up for v3.12.

Looking through arch/arm/boot/dts/ I see that we have:

1. {gpio,pfc}-r8aXXXX and;
2. r8aXXXX-sdhi

The inconsistency that Olof has asked us to resolve is that we
should either use r8aXXXX- or -r8aXXXX. Not both.

It seems to me that neither option is inherently better than the other
so we should just choose the path of least resistance to make things
consistent.

Laurent, Guennadi, do you have any opinions on if it would
be easier to change the GPIO and PFC compatibility strings;
or to change the SDHI compatibility strings?

Ideally I would like you to come to some sort of consensus and send
patches.

So, by all means clean this up in the dts.

BUT, in keeping with the recent discussions on improving the DT
process, the corresponding drivers must continue to recognize both
forms, so that old DTs will still work correctly.

Given the early state of DT support in arm/mach-shmobile, I'm pretty sure we 
have no DT-based systems in the wild. The old compatibility string could in my 
opinion just be dropped.

Hm, well, ok.  Just remember to always err on the side of broad
compatiblity.  We've become sloppy with incompatible DT updates and
its caused us a bunch of grief.

-- 
David Gibson			| I'll have my music baroque, and my code
david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au	| minimalist, thank you.  NOT _the_ _other_
				| _way_ _around_!
http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson