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;
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] dt-bindings: mtd: Document use of nvmem-partitions
 compatible
To:     Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>
Cc:     Ansuel Smith <ansuelsmth@gmail.com>,
        Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>,
        devicetree@vger.kernel.org, Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@ti.com>,
        Boris Brezillon <bbrezillon@kernel.org>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org,
        Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@bootlin.com>
References: <20210216212638.28382-1-ansuelsmth@gmail.com>
 <20210216212638.28382-4-ansuelsmth@gmail.com>
 <1cf374f1-09d5-9fa9-9b0d-d8079f2f6fbc@gmail.com>
 <20210305222300.GA718014@robh.at.kernel.org>
From:   =?UTF-8?B?UmFmYcWCIE1pxYJlY2tp?= <zajec5@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <9167d2be-067e-4ad3-9c8b-28bb549187aa@gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 8 Mar 2021 10:45:32 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/78.6.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20210305222300.GA718014@robh.at.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk

On 05.03.2021 23:23, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 03, 2021 at 11:01:55AM +0100, Rafał Miłecki wrote:
>> [Rob: please advise]
>>
>> On 16.02.2021 22:26, Ansuel Smith wrote:
>>> Document nvmem-partitions compatible used to treat mtd partitions as a
>>> nvmem provider.
>>
>> Until now we were using "compatible" string in partition node only for
>> parsers (looking for subpartitions). We need to think if this change can
>> break anything from DT / Linux perspective.
>>
>> Compatible strings should be unique, so there is no risk of conflict
>> between NVMEM and parsers.
>>
>> Now: can we ever need mtd partition to:
>> 1. Contain subpartitions
>> 2. Provide NVMEM
>> at the same time?
>>
>> Let's say:
>>
>> partition@0 {
>> 	compatible = "vendor,dynamic-firmware-partitions", "nvmem-partitions";
> 
> I think you'd want the "vendor,dynamic-firmware-partitions" parser/code
> to serve up any nvmem regions. Whether you have a fallback here depends
> if an OS could make use of the regions knowing nothing about
> "vendor,dynamic-firmware-partitions".

Perfect! I didn't think that driver handling
"vendor,dynamic-firmware-partitions" may also take care of NVMEM.

Thank you.