[PATCH v4 2/4] dt-bindings: media: Document bindings for HDMI RX Controller

Krzysztof Kozlowski krzk at kernel.org
Wed Jul 24 23:38:34 PDT 2024


On 25/07/2024 08:35, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 24/07/2024 15:20, Johan Jonker wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Where did you learn that? Having non-SoC specific generic fallback
>>> compatibles is pretty much standard throughout the kernel. See for
>>> example these RK3588 DesignWare compatibles:
>>>
>>> Synopsys Serial Controller:
>>>     Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/snps-dw-apb-uart.yaml
>>>     compatible = "rockchip,rk3588-uart", "snps,dw-apb-uart";
>>
>> Compatible method #2:
>> 	{ .compatible = "snps,dw-apb-uart", .data = &dw8250_dw_apb },
>>
>>>
>>> Synopsys USB3 Controller:
>>>     Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/rockchip,dwc3.yaml
>>>     compatible = "rockchip,rk3588-dwc3", "snps,dwc3";
>>
>> Compatible method #2:
>> 	{
>> 		.compatible = "snps,dwc3"
>> 	},
>>
>>>
>>> Synopsys Ethernet Controller:
>>>     Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/snps,dwmac.yaml
>>>     compatible = "rockchip,rk3588-gmac", "snps,dwmac-4.20a";
>>
>> Compatible method #1:
>> 	{ .compatible = "rockchip,rk3588-gmac", .data = &rk3588_ops },
>>
>> 	    of_device_is_compatible(np, "snps,dwmac-4.20a") ||
>>
>>>
>>> Synsopsys SATA Controller:
>>>     Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ata/rockchip,dwc-ahci.yaml
>>>     compatible = "rockchip,rk3588-dwc-ahci", "snps,dwc-ahci"
>>
>> Compatible method #2:
>> 	{ .compatible = "snps,dwc-ahci", &ahci_dwc_plat },
>>
>>>
>>> It's also not specific to Synopsys (but RK3588 has a lot of Synopsys
>>> design incl. the HDMI-RX IP currently worked on by Shreeya). Here
>>> are some other examples:
>>>
>>> ARM Mali GPU:
>>>     Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpu/arm,mali-valhall-csf.yaml
>>>     compatible = "rockchip,rk3588-mali", "arm,mali-valhall-csf";
>>
>> Should be compatible method #2:
>> 	{ .compatible = "rockchip,rk3588-mali" },
>> 	{ .compatible = "arm,mali-valhall-csf" },
>>
>> This is wrong!
> 
> Except that it is pointless and redundant, why is it wrong? You did not
> bring any argument, except "will trigger 2 probes" which is clearly false.
> 
>> Each strings will trigger a probe.
> 
> What? That's not true.

Although if you meant "any string will trigger one probe in total", then
it would be true, so maybe that's what you meant.

But then - what's wrong with this (except needless redundancy)? You did
not bring any argument but keep calling more than once "wrong". So what
is wrong?

Best regards,
Krzysztof




More information about the linux-arm-kernel mailing list