On 21.11.21 21:33, Sander Vanheule wrote:

Alternatively, a second compatible could perhaps be introduced and the current
one would be deprecated, using (2) to prevent breaking 5.16+ kernels. I don't
think that's really worth the effort though.

Best,

Hey,

I think that what Marc proposed as (1) is the clean solution. We want to 
describe the HW as it exists. Yes we have zero docs, and the RLT 2.6 sdk 
kernel is a pain to extract info from, yet we should move fwd with a 
clean implementation.

breaking pseudo owrt dts ABI is imho acceptable. owrt users are well 
able to reflash their units from uboot, they are at the end flying 
without wings on bleeding edge. asking for some backward compat for a 
de-facto broken dts mapping of the HW is imho a no-go.
	
	John