Re: [PATCH 1/2] Documentation: devicetree: m25p80: add "nor-jedec" binding

On Sun, Mar 22, 2015 at 12:30:05AM +0100, Rafał Miłecki wrote:

On 20 March 2015 at 20:12, Brian Norris [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

Yes, and that is an eventual goal I suppose, but the current list is
excessive and is most likely not currently relied on by any one. So I
don't just want to C&P the entire list into this binding immediately.

I guess my plan looks like this:

1. add "nor-jedec" binding, to provide lowest common denominator binding
(this series)

2. stop adding to the m25p_ids[] table unless necessary (enabled by this
series)

3. gauge whether we can remove certain entries from m25p_ids[] (e.g., if
they were only used in platform_data, not DT; or if they were very
recently added just to synchronize with spi-nor.c)

Why we can't remove (slowly) all entries from m25p_ids that don't need
any extra handling?

If we'll have DT with
"spansion,m25p80", "nor-jedec"
and then m25p80.c will handle both: "m25p80" and "nor-jedec" without
any difference, what's the point of keeping "m25p80" entry?

ABI stability. A lot of DTBs might be using m25p80 already, and they
aren't supposed to have to update just because SW decided to drop them.
But see [1] for the official word on ABI stability. I think that leaves
room for removing most/all of these eventually.

Brian

[1] Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ABI.txt
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html