On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 1:53 PM, Wolfram Sang [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

There are three compatible strings defined for the ADXL345 and ADXL346 in
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/trivial-devices.txt: "adi,adxl345",
"adi,adxl346", "adi,adxl34x". Given that the last one is a fallback for the
first two I don't see a need to add the specific compatible strings to the
driver for now. If a new totally incompatible chip named ADXL347 comes out we
will need a new driver which won't be allowed to use the "adi,adxl34x"
compatible string.

Been there, got bitten. We only found out too late, because one driver
was in i2c and the other in GPIO (or LED even?), both using "953x" :(

Yep, pca953x => leds-pca953x

quoted

An option would be to remove "adi,adxl34x" from
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/trivial-devices.txt, in which case the
driver should match explicitly on "adi,adxl345" and "adi,adxl346". That might
clash with the DT ABI stability requirements though.

I do prefer this:

1) add specific compatible values to the driver. We do those updates for
new devices all the time
2) also add "34x" as a compatible but mark it as deprecateed
3) delete "34x" from trivial devices

Everyone OK with that?

Sounds fine to me. Thanks!

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

                        Geert

--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
                                -- Linus Torvalds