Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932380AbcDLJXO (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Apr 2016 05:23:14 -0400 Received: from eusmtp01.atmel.com ([212.144.249.242]:49551 "EHLO eusmtp01.atmel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755962AbcDLJXM (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Apr 2016 05:23:12 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH RFT 2/2] macb: kill PHY reset code To: Andrew Lunn , Sergei Shtylyov References: <81129033.NXiOLTg1so@wasted.cogentembedded.com> <2811962.eGX2i5RJbZ@wasted.cogentembedded.com> <20160411022802.GB4307@lunn.ch> <570BE1C5.70502@cogentembedded.com> <20160411181904.GB29709@lunn.ch> <570BEF46.7060105@cogentembedded.com> <20160411185115.GA30623@lunn.ch> CC: , , From: Nicolas Ferre Organization: atmel Message-ID: <570CBE91.7020406@atmel.com> Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2016 11:23:29 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20160411185115.GA30623@lunn.ch> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Originating-IP: [10.161.30.18] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1252 Lines: 39 Le 11/04/2016 20:51, Andrew Lunn a ?crit : > On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 09:39:02PM +0300, Sergei Shtylyov wrote: >> Hello. >> >> On 04/11/2016 09:19 PM, Andrew Lunn wrote: >> >>>>> The code you are deleting would of ignored the flags in the gpio >>>>> property, i.e. active low. >>>> >>>> Hm, you're right -- I forgot about that... :-/ >>>> >>>>> The new code in the previous patch does >>>>> however take the flags into account. Did you check if there are any >>>>> device trees which have flags, which were never used, but are now >>>>> going to be used and thus break... >>>> >>>> Checked this now and found out arch/arm/boot/dts/ar91-vinco.dts. >>>> Looks like it needs to be fixed indeed... >>>> >>> And this is where it gets tricky. You are breaking backwards >>> compatibility by now respecting the flag. An old DT blob is not going >>> to work. >> >> Do we care that much about the DT blobs that are just *wrong*? > > Wrong, but currently works. > >>> You potentially need to add a new property and deprecate the old one. >> >> I would like to avoid that... > > You will need the agreement from the at91-vinco maintainer. If the at91-vinco has to be modified, you have my agreement that it can be modified. Bye, -- Nicolas Ferre