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;
Date:   Mon, 4 Oct 2021 13:59:20 -0500
From:   Nishanth Menon <nm@ti.com>
To:     Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>
CC:     Tero Kristo <kristo@kernel.org>,
        Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@ti.com>,
        <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
        <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>, Suman Anna <s-anna@ti.com>,
        Sinthu Raja <sinthu.raja@ti.com>,
        Hari Nagalla <hnagalla@ti.com>,
        Sinthu Raja <sinthu.raja@mistralsolutions.com>,
        Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@siemens.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 2/4] dt-bindings: arm: ti: am642/am654: Allow for SoC
 only compatibles
Message-ID: <20211004185920.26iyyq3xz7vjam5i@gentile>
References: <20210925201430.11678-1-nm@ti.com>
 <20210925201430.11678-3-nm@ti.com>
 <YVs/v7g8wwLq/ujb@robh.at.kernel.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <YVs/v7g8wwLq/ujb@robh.at.kernel.org>
User-Agent: NeoMutt/20171215
Precedence: bulk

On 12:54-20211004, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 25, 2021 at 03:14:28PM -0500, Nishanth Menon wrote:
> > Maintain consistency in K3 SoCs by allowing AM654 and AM642 platforms
> > just state SoC compatibles without specific board specific compatibles
> > aligned with what we have done for J721E/J7200 platforms as well.
> 
> This is the wrong direction IMO. Why do you want this other than 
> alignment?

Many downstream boards tend not to have an specific compatible at least
during initial phase and I would like folks to start using checks to
make sure that the easy to catch issues via match against bindings are
already handled.

I am curious as to why you think this is wrong - because we permit an
alternative option that allows the board files to be less specific?

[...]
-- 
Regards,
Nishanth Menon
Key (0xDDB5849D1736249D)/Fingerprint: F8A2 8693 54EB 8232 17A3  1A34 DDB5 849D 1736 249D