Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754171AbbKBStn (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 Nov 2015 13:49:43 -0500 Received: from smtp.codeaurora.org ([198.145.29.96]:38303 "EHLO smtp.codeaurora.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753166AbbKBSti (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 Nov 2015 13:49:38 -0500 Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 1/3] dma: add Qualcomm Technologies HIDMA management driver To: Rob Herring , Timur Tabi References: <1446444460-21600-1-git-send-email-okaya@codeaurora.org> <1446444460-21600-2-git-send-email-okaya@codeaurora.org> <56378D38.9050509@codeaurora.org> <56379CD6.5020807@codeaurora.org> Cc: dmaengine@vger.kernel.org, Christopher Covington , "jcm@redhat.com" , Pawel Moll , Mark Rutland , Ian Campbell , Kumar Gala , Vinod Koul , Dan Williams , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" From: Sinan Kaya Message-ID: <5637B03F.9090905@codeaurora.org> Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2015 13:49:35 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1568 Lines: 46 On 11/2/2015 12:42 PM, Rob Herring wrote: > Except I was suggesting not using 1.0 or 1.1. There is one main > exception and that is Xilinx blocks, but they are releasing versions > of blocks to customers. If "1.0" is not a well defined number, then > don't use that. I'd be surprised if any SOC vendor had such well > defined process around versioning of their IP blocks such that they > are well documented and guaranteed such that every change will change > the version. Here is one. I have two versions of the same IP. The first version in one chip has sw_version register that returns 1.0. The second version which has more capabilities has 1.1 in it. Is it OK to use? compatible="qcom,hidma-mgmt-1.0", "qcom,hidma-mgmt" for now and compatible="qcom,hidma-mgmt-1.1", "qcom,hidma-mgmt" later for the second chip? 1.1 is backwards compatible with 1.0 BTW. Since the same IP goes into multiple chips, why would you list the chip name here and submit patches multiple times for each single chip. or to follow what Timur did, I can do this. "qcom,qdf2xxx-hidma-mgmt-1.0" qdf2xxx would become the chip family. -- Sinan Kaya Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/