The description below will be used for rv1126.dtsi or rk3568.dtsi in
the future
Signed-off-by: Jon Lin <[email protected]>
---
Changes in v4:
- Adjust the order patches
- Simply commit massage like redundancy "application" content
Changes in v3:
- Fix compile error which is find by Sascha in [v2,2/8]
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/spi-rockchip.yaml | 2 ++
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/spi-rockchip.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/spi-rockchip.yaml
index 1e6cf29e6388..2d7957f9ae0a 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/spi-rockchip.yaml
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/spi-rockchip.yaml
@@ -27,12 +27,14 @@ properties:
- items:
- enum:
- rockchip,px30-spi
+ - rockchip,rv1126-spi
- rockchip,rk3188-spi
- rockchip,rk3288-spi
- rockchip,rk3308-spi
- rockchip,rk3328-spi
- rockchip,rk3368-spi
- rockchip,rk3399-spi
+ - rockchip,rk3568-spi
- const: rockchip,rk3066-spi
reg:
--
2.17.1
Hi Jon,
On 6/7/21 8:34 AM, Jon Lin wrote:
> The description below will be used for rv1126.dtsi or rk3568.dtsi in
> the future
>
> Signed-off-by: Jon Lin <[email protected]>
> ---
>
> Changes in v4:
> - Adjust the order patches
> - Simply commit massage like redundancy "application" content
>
> Changes in v3:
> - Fix compile error which is find by Sascha in [v2,2/8]
>
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/spi-rockchip.yaml | 2 ++
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/spi-rockchip.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/spi-rockchip.yaml
> index 1e6cf29e6388..2d7957f9ae0a 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/spi-rockchip.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/spi-rockchip.yaml
> @@ -27,12 +27,14 @@ properties:
> - items:
> - enum:
> - rockchip,px30-spi
> + - rockchip,rv1126-spi
This list is sort alphabetically.
Move "rockchip,rv1126-spi" below "rockchip,rk3568-spi"
> - rockchip,rk3188-spi
> - rockchip,rk3288-spi
> - rockchip,rk3308-spi
> - rockchip,rk3328-spi
> - rockchip,rk3368-spi
> - rockchip,rk3399-spi
> + - rockchip,rk3568-spi
> - const: rockchip,rk3066-spi
>
> reg:
>
===
Your comment in [PATCH v3 3/8]:
>> Adding "rockchip,rv1126-spi" to rockchip_spi_dt_match[] is strictly not
>> needed when using "rockchip,rk3066-spi" as fall back string.
>> Could a maintainer advise?
>>
>> Maybe this bug of mine should revert too?? Or is it legacy?
>> spi: rockchip: add compatible string for px30 rk3308 rk3328
>> https://lore.kernel.org/r/[email protected]
> I agree with you. If the maintainer doesn't have any comments, I will use
> "rockchip,spi" as compatible names for the subsequent rk platform.
Compatibility strings are supposed to be SoC orientated.
So generic ones like in the manufacturer tree can't be used here.
===
Johan
Am Montag, 7. Juni 2021, 10:15:30 CEST schrieb Johan Jonker:
> Hi Jon,
>
> On 6/7/21 8:34 AM, Jon Lin wrote:
> > The description below will be used for rv1126.dtsi or rk3568.dtsi in
> > the future
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jon Lin <[email protected]>
> > ---
> >
> > Changes in v4:
> > - Adjust the order patches
> > - Simply commit massage like redundancy "application" content
> >
> > Changes in v3:
> > - Fix compile error which is find by Sascha in [v2,2/8]
> >
> > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/spi-rockchip.yaml | 2 ++
> > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/spi-rockchip.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/spi-rockchip.yaml
> > index 1e6cf29e6388..2d7957f9ae0a 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/spi-rockchip.yaml
> > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/spi-rockchip.yaml
> > @@ -27,12 +27,14 @@ properties:
> > - items:
> > - enum:
> > - rockchip,px30-spi
>
> > + - rockchip,rv1126-spi
>
> This list is sort alphabetically.
> Move "rockchip,rv1126-spi" below "rockchip,rk3568-spi"
>
> > - rockchip,rk3188-spi
> > - rockchip,rk3288-spi
> > - rockchip,rk3308-spi
> > - rockchip,rk3328-spi
> > - rockchip,rk3368-spi
> > - rockchip,rk3399-spi
> > + - rockchip,rk3568-spi
>
>
> > - const: rockchip,rk3066-spi
> >
> > reg:
> >
>
> ===
>
> Your comment in [PATCH v3 3/8]:
> >> Adding "rockchip,rv1126-spi" to rockchip_spi_dt_match[] is strictly not
> >> needed when using "rockchip,rk3066-spi" as fall back string.
> >> Could a maintainer advise?
> >>
> >> Maybe this bug of mine should revert too?? Or is it legacy?
> >> spi: rockchip: add compatible string for px30 rk3308 rk3328
> >> https://lore.kernel.org/r/[email protected]
>
> > I agree with you. If the maintainer doesn't have any comments, I will use
> > "rockchip,spi" as compatible names for the subsequent rk platform.
>
> Compatibility strings are supposed to be SoC orientated.
> So generic ones like in the manufacturer tree can't be used here.
Johan ist right :-) .
rockchip,spi won't work at all, especially as these controllers always change
over time. [0]
Best example is the iommu. We started with "rockchip,iommu" thinking this
won't change over time, but with the rk3568 we get a new slightly different
iommu.
The vendor-kernel then introduces somewhat random "-vX" additions to
distinguish them, but often they do seem to be very software-centric.
Meaning, hardware-designers moved stuff around and software-developers
then invented the versioning to differentiate between versions.
The devicetree is supposed to describe the hardware though, so going with
the relevant soc-specific compatible gives us the necessary hardware-centric
differentiation.
Also this allows to catch later issues with specific soc implementations ;-)
Like 6 monts down the road we discover some special behaviour on the
rk3568 and devicetree is supposed to be stable.
So having the relevant compatibles in place allows us to just add driver
fixes and have those apply on the rk3568 if that is need at some point.
Heiko
On 6/7/21 5:04 PM, Heiko Stübner wrote:
> Am Montag, 7. Juni 2021, 10:15:30 CEST schrieb Johan Jonker:
>> Hi Jon,
>>
>> On 6/7/21 8:34 AM, Jon Lin wrote:
>>> The description below will be used for rv1126.dtsi or rk3568.dtsi in
>>> the future
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Jon Lin <[email protected]>
>>> ---
>>>
>>> Changes in v4:
>>> - Adjust the order patches
>>> - Simply commit massage like redundancy "application" content
>>>
>>> Changes in v3:
>>> - Fix compile error which is find by Sascha in [v2,2/8]
>>>
>>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/spi-rockchip.yaml | 2 ++
>>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/spi-rockchip.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/spi-rockchip.yaml
>>> index 1e6cf29e6388..2d7957f9ae0a 100644
>>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/spi-rockchip.yaml
>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/spi-rockchip.yaml
>>> @@ -27,12 +27,14 @@ properties:
>>> - items:
>>> - enum:
>>> - rockchip,px30-spi
>>> + - rockchip,rv1126-spi
>> This list is sort alphabetically.
>> Move "rockchip,rv1126-spi" below "rockchip,rk3568-spi"
>>
>>> - rockchip,rk3188-spi
>>> - rockchip,rk3288-spi
>>> - rockchip,rk3308-spi
>>> - rockchip,rk3328-spi
>>> - rockchip,rk3368-spi
>>> - rockchip,rk3399-spi
>>> + - rockchip,rk3568-spi
>>
>>> - const: rockchip,rk3066-spi
>>>
>>> reg:
>>>
>> ===
>>
>> Your comment in [PATCH v3 3/8]:
>>>> Adding "rockchip,rv1126-spi" to rockchip_spi_dt_match[] is strictly not
>>>> needed when using "rockchip,rk3066-spi" as fall back string.
>>>> Could a maintainer advise?
With consulting to my colleague，we plane to:
1.If new soc's spi ip is compatible with the fall back one, we wont add
new compatible id to the code.
2.I will add new fall back string stand for new generation ip:
rockchip,rv1126-spi
>>>>
>>>> Maybe this bug of mine should revert too?? Or is it legacy?
>>>> spi: rockchip: add compatible string for px30 rk3308 rk3328
>>>> https://lore.kernel.org/r/[email protected]
>>> I agree with you. If the maintainer doesn't have any comments, I will use
>>> "rockchip,spi" as compatible names for the subsequent rk platform.
>> Compatibility strings are supposed to be SoC orientated.
>> So generic ones like in the manufacturer tree can't be used here.
> Johan ist right :-) .
>
> rockchip,spi won't work at all, especially as these controllers always change
> over time. [0]
>
> Best example is the iommu. We started with "rockchip,iommu" thinking this
> won't change over time, but with the rk3568 we get a new slightly different
> iommu.
>
> The vendor-kernel then introduces somewhat random "-vX" additions to
> distinguish them, but often they do seem to be very software-centric.
>
> Meaning, hardware-designers moved stuff around and software-developers
> then invented the versioning to differentiate between versions.
>
> The devicetree is supposed to describe the hardware though, so going with
> the relevant soc-specific compatible gives us the necessary hardware-centric
> differentiation.
>
> Also this allows to catch later issues with specific soc implementations ;-)
> Like 6 monts down the road we discover some special behaviour on the
> rk3568 and devicetree is supposed to be stable.
>
> So having the relevant compatibles in place allows us to just add driver
> fixes and have those apply on the rk3568 if that is need at some point.
>
> Heiko
>
After the explain from you and Johan, I found that the idea
"rockchip,spi" was immature.
>
>
>
>
Hi Heiko, Johan,
On 2021/6/7 下午5:04, Heiko Stübner wrote:
> Your comment in [PATCH v3 3/8]:
>>>> Adding "rockchip,rv1126-spi" to rockchip_spi_dt_match[] is strictly not
>>>> needed when using "rockchip,rk3066-spi" as fall back string.
>>>> Could a maintainer advise?
>>>>
>>>> Maybe this bug of mine should revert too?? Or is it legacy?
>>>> spi: rockchip: add compatible string for px30 rk3308 rk3328
>>>> https://lore.kernel.org/r/[email protected]
>>> I agree with you. If the maintainer doesn't have any comments, I will use
>>> "rockchip,spi" as compatible names for the subsequent rk platform.
>> Compatibility strings are supposed to be SoC orientated.
>> So generic ones like in the manufacturer tree can't be used here.
> Johan ist right :-) .
>
> rockchip,spi won't work at all, especially as these controllers always change
> over time. [0]
>
> Best example is the iommu. We started with "rockchip,iommu" thinking this
> won't change over time, but with the rk3568 we get a new slightly different
> iommu.
Rockchip SPI and SFC controller can use a generic compatible string,
because there is a version
register inside the IP, and all the feature update will have a new IP
version, so the driver is
used for the SPI/SFC IP in all SoCs, we don't need to care which SoC is
using this driver.
If we have to use the compatible string "rockchip,rk3066-spi" and each
for a new soc, then we
have to update the driver compatible id list and document for each soc
which is totally not need
and not correct to do it.
The example "iommu" is different, because there is no version register
inside the IP and the IP
can not identify itself, which need a software define "-vX".
Thanks,
- Kever
> The vendor-kernel then introduces somewhat random "-vX" additions to
> distinguish them, but often they do seem to be very software-centric.
>
> Meaning, hardware-designers moved stuff around and software-developers
> then invented the versioning to differentiate between versions.
>
> The devicetree is supposed to describe the hardware though, so going with
> the relevant soc-specific compatible gives us the necessary hardware-centric
> differentiation.
>
> Also this allows to catch later issues with specific soc implementations ;-)
> Like 6 monts down the road we discover some special behaviour on the
> rk3568 and devicetree is supposed to be stable.
>
> So having the relevant compatibles in place allows us to just add driver
> fixes and have those apply on the rk3568 if that is need at some point.
>
> Heiko
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Linux-rockchip mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-rockchip
>
>