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;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20210612094631.89980-1-martin.botka@somainline.org>
 <20210612094631.89980-3-martin.botka@somainline.org> <CABb+yY3BYYC2na8EFunEeu0XCfLXrUQon=hF3q5p=+FUoigoyw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAL_JsqLWqtAtqLRF-MAnq80NMfD0a+CfWPv8JWjjNTJFgMjCxg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CABb+yY0sdSinTm788pMFrqEZ6QMC2OwCP7Kkto+pG9h1aGMzwQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAL_JsqKdoMwpL_tYC7VQRAG2AC5nR4diShMQCgDseObcgU+egQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <YNEiUMBqGAx1zLVX@yoga> <CABb+yY2wy4iSKjn+SihQ=FE=YwcEzUNOpGw_CV22Anzgbba8hA@mail.gmail.com>
 <YNFKpvhXyZbs8RE1@yoga> <CABb+yY3RpQYvNBHvpwZearpBPph0uj8YQwX2qu=TX=QAO6OFBw@mail.gmail.com>
 <YNFegmmCzk6JUTN+@yoga>
In-Reply-To: <YNFegmmCzk6JUTN+@yoga>
From:   Jassi Brar <jassisinghbrar@gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 22 Jun 2021 09:37:54 -0500
Message-ID: <CABb+yY1PB+AqjGkRP3rgDbN6Sy4HUCh3gME2+aQTA4oeO01F6w@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 3/3] mailbox: qcom-apcs: Add SM6125 compatible
To:     Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@linaro.org>
Cc:     Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
        Martin Botka <martin.botka@somainline.org>,
        ~postmarketos/upstreaming@lists.sr.ht,
        Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@somainline.org>,
        AngeloGioacchino Del Regno 
        <angelogioacchino.delregno@somainline.org>,
        Marijn Suijten <marijn.suijten@somainline.org>,
        jamipkettunen@somainline.org, Andy Gross <agross@kernel.org>,
        linux-arm-msm <linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Jun 21, 2021 at 10:52 PM Bjorn Andersson
<bjorn.andersson@linaro.org> wrote:


> > > > > > In any case, we can't really get rid of the first 13 instances though...
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Right, we have the problem that we have DTBs out there that relies on
> > > > > these compatibles, but as Jassi requests we'd have to start describing
> > > > > the internal register layout in DT - which this binding purposefully
> > > > > avoids.
> > > > >
> > > > Not these strings, but 'offset' and 'clock-name' as optional
> > > > properties that new platforms can use.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Relying on completely generic compatibles to match the driver and then
> > > distinguish each platform using additional properties is exactly what
> > > Qualcomm does downstream.  The community has clarified countless times
> > > that this is not the way to write DT bindings.
> > >
> > Yes, and I don't suggest it otherwise. For h/w quirks and
> > extra/missing features, it does make sense to have different
> > compatibles.
> >
>
> But what you're suggesting assumes that they are the same and that we're
> done implementing all the software for this block. The platform specific
> compatible allows us to postpone that question.
>
It has been 4yrs and 13 platforms. The compatible strings are used
only to match the hardcoded 'offset' values. Maybe we cross the bridge
when we get to it.
I think, when the drivers are enhanced and the kernel binary needs to
be updated, we could update the dtb as well? Or is it too hard on
these platforms?

cheers.