Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2016 16:35:54 -0700
From: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>
To: Steve Twiss <stwiss.opensource@diasemi.com>
Cc: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>, Wim Van Sebroeck <wim@iguana.be>,
        Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>,
        Eduardo Valentin <edubezval@gmail.com>,
        Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>,
        DEVICETREE <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
        LINUX-INPUT <linux-input@vger.kernel.org>,
        LINUX-PM <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
        Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@gmail.com>, Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>, Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
        Support Opensource <Support.Opensource@diasemi.com>,
        LINUX-KERNEL <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        LINUX-WATCHDOG <linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V1 04/10] watchdog: da9061: watchdog driver (RFC)
Message-ID: <20161007233554.GA21386@dtor-ws>
References: <6ED8E3B22081A4459DAC7699F3695FB7018CCE242C@SW-EX-MBX02.diasemi.com>
 <20161006184927.GB11915@roeck-us.net>
 <6ED8E3B22081A4459DAC7699F3695FB7018CCE2732@SW-EX-MBX02.diasemi.com>
 <20161007170214.GA21349@roeck-us.net>
 <6ED8E3B22081A4459DAC7699F3695FB7018CCE282C@SW-EX-MBX02.diasemi.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <6ED8E3B22081A4459DAC7699F3695FB7018CCE282C@SW-EX-MBX02.diasemi.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1973
Lines: 46

On Fri, Oct 07, 2016 at 06:01:23PM +0000, Steve Twiss wrote:
> On 07 October 2016 18:02, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> 
> > > On 06 October 2016 19:49, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Oct 06, 2016 at 04:28:14PM +0000, Steve Twiss wrote:
> > > > > I am using the compatible string to pick a different configuration .data block:
> > > > > { .compatible = "dlg,da9062-watchdog", .data = &da9062_watchdog_info },
> > > > > { .compatible = "dlg,da9061-watchdog", .data = &da9061_watchdog_info },
> > > > >
> > > > > But, it is just my opinion to keep the "name" different.
> > > > > This will not be my decision if accepted into the Linux kernel, but I would like to
> > > > > at least be consistent for DA9061 and DA9062 so ... is this an issue?
> > > >
> > > > FWIW the driver doesn't really need to be updated in the first place.
> > > > A compatible statement listing both da9061 and da9062 would do it.
> > >
> > > I will make the changes you requested: deprecate the existing compatibility
> > > for da9062-watchdog and make a new compatibility string which combines both
> > > da9061 and da9062.
> > >
> > That is not what I asked for.
> 
> Ok. Did you mean separate compatible statements with data sections pointing at 
> the same structure?
> 
> Like this:
> { .compatible = "dlg,da9062-watchdog", .data = &da9062_watchdog_info },
> { .compatible = "dlg,da9061-watchdog", .data = &da9062_watchdog_info },
> 
> So this would be the only change needed in the device driver.

If there is no change in IP block then I do not see why we need to
introduce new names at all. The dts can specify fallback compatible
stting. Note, it is called *compatible* not "model" or "device id" or
whatever. So you can just say in DTS:

	compatible = "dlg,da9061-watchdog", "dlg,da9062-watchdog";

and leave the driver alone. That goes for input part as well. You only
need to add new compatible to the driver when it in fact is
*incompatible* with the existing blocks.

Thanks.

-- 
Dmitry