Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
From:   Kevin Hilman <khilman@baylibre.com>
To:     Christian Hewitt <christianshewitt@gmail.com>,
        Jerome Brunet <jbrunet@baylibre.com>
Cc:     Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
        devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
        linux-amlogic@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: dts: meson: add SM1 soundcard name to VIM3L
In-Reply-To: <785296E3-FA91-4F5E-A8C0-1FAA8C576A17@gmail.com>
References: <20201002141619.14387-1-christianshewitt@gmail.com> <1jzh54it6f.fsf@starbuckisacylon.baylibre.com> <785296E3-FA91-4F5E-A8C0-1FAA8C576A17@gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 02 Oct 2020 11:45:28 -0700
Message-ID: <7h7ds8mppz.fsf@baylibre.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: bulk

Christian Hewitt <christianshewitt@gmail.com> writes:

>> On 2 Oct 2020, at 6:44 pm, Jerome Brunet <jbrunet@baylibre.com> wrote:
>>=20
>> On Fri 02 Oct 2020 at 16:16, Christian Hewitt <christianshewitt@gmail.co=
m> wrote:
>>=20
>>> VIM3L now inherits the sound node from the VIM3 common dtsi but is
>>> an SM1 device, so label it as such, and stop users blaming future
>>> support issues on the distro/app "wrongly detecting" their device.
>>>=20
>>> Signed-off-by: Christian Hewitt <christianshewitt@gmail.com>
>>> ---
>>> arch/arm64/boot/dts/amlogic/meson-sm1-khadas-vim3l.dts | 4 ++++
>>> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
>>>=20
>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/amlogic/meson-sm1-khadas-vim3l.dts b/a=
rch/arm64/boot/dts/amlogic/meson-sm1-khadas-vim3l.dts
>>> index 4b517ca72059..f46f0ecc37ec 100644
>>> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/amlogic/meson-sm1-khadas-vim3l.dts
>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/amlogic/meson-sm1-khadas-vim3l.dts
>>> @@ -32,6 +32,10 @@
>>> 		regulator-boot-on;
>>> 		regulator-always-on;
>>> 	};
>>> +
>>> +	sound {
>>> +		model =3D "SM1-KHADAS-VIM3L";
>>> +	};
>>=20
>> The sound card is the same so I don't see why the sm1 board should have
>> a different name. If you are not happy with the name, please update it
>> in the common file.
>
> It=E2=80=99s a nice-to-have not a must-have, but the current LE images th=
at are
> in circulation use 5.7 with the previous board-correct name so I was
> looking for continuity. We do see user forum reports (infrequent but
> recurring) of wrongly detected hardware with other SoC platforms where
> similar name inheritance surfaces the =E2=80=98wrong=E2=80=99 device name=
 in GUIs, and
> I like anything that avoids support work.
>
> I=E2=80=99d suggest KHADAS-VIM3-VIM3L as a common name, but then it=E2=80=
=99s the only
> device in the current device-tree set that is not prefixed with the SoC
> identifier, which (OCD) feels wrong.

True, but turns out there's nothing SoC specific about this sound block
since it's identical across SoCs, so specifying the SoC is being too
specific.=20

OTOH, while I agree it looks "wrong", it's pretty common in Linux DT to
have the SoC prefix to mean only that it's "compatible" with that SoC,
not that it *is* that SoC.

However, I agree that that can lead to confusion with end users, so
since this change has not functional change, and only a UX issue in
userspace, I'm fine to apply it.

Kevin