Received-SPF: softfail (google.com: domain of transitioning linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org does not designate 23.128.96.19 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.19;
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <Yn2YvIFNhaz5GmfI@google.com>
References: <20220429233112.2851665-1-swboyd@chromium.org> <20220429233112.2851665-2-swboyd@chromium.org>
 <CAD=FV=VX8EEgkeLgKwyKvjztcjbA8UhKOUpTr-sS1_Ec=QcWbA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKdAkRSOtAD6u_cwKhHeMLgz5dC2hfPvVvqmj+17b4i-nspfgg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAE-0n50Y8tZD9Djn9TVaAiHxehFJ2cZKZ1Z09piDk47uw3nK+Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <Ynzf5jEIECLmELK7@google.com> <CAE-0n50+obQ5qgPNPtUY=OmTgU9bZQ3hNw+MaG9Wi3SQSc-i4A@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAE-0n52WVNru5fnyaB_7wcBOk4twL0Q92YpRbd40-o6ZBmbXWQ@mail.gmail.com> <Yn2YvIFNhaz5GmfI@google.com>
From:   Stephen Boyd <swboyd@chromium.org>
User-Agent: alot/0.10
Date:   Thu, 12 May 2022 16:46:22 -0700
Message-ID: <CAE-0n52ofANUWOY5h=Jjy5SYv=bnxO3xyN4cm3qGVRYmDtkNBQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] dt-bindings: google,cros-ec-keyb: Introduce
 switches only compatible
To:     Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>
Cc:     Doug Anderson <dianders@chromium.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, patches@lists.linux.dev,
        chrome-platform@lists.linux.dev,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>, devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
        Benson Leung <bleung@chromium.org>,
        Guenter Roeck <groeck@chromium.org>,
        Hsin-Yi Wang <hsinyi@chromium.org>,
        "Joseph S. Barrera III" <joebar@chromium.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

Quoting Dmitry Torokhov (2022-05-12 16:31:08)
> On Thu, May 12, 2022 at 01:11:39PM -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> > Quoting Stephen Boyd (2022-05-12 11:58:02)
> > > Quoting Dmitry Torokhov (2022-05-12 03:22:30)
> > > >
> > > > Have we solved module loading in the presence of multiple compatibles?
> > > > IIRC we only ever try to load module on the first compatible, so you'd
> > > > be breaking autoloading cros-ec-keyb on these older kernels. I think the
> > > > cure that is being proposed is worse than the disease.
> > > >
> > >
> > > The first compatible is still cros-ec-keyb in the driver though? Or you
> > > mean the first compatible in the node? I'm not aware of this problem at
> > > all but I can certainly test out a fake node and module and see if it
> > > gets autoloaded.
> >
> > I can't get this test module to fail to load no matter what I do. I
> > commented out the second match table entry, and kept it there and
> > removed 'vendor,switch-compat' from the DTS. Module still autoloads.
> >
>
> Ah, indeed, if the module contains both compatibles we will load it. It
> is broken when we have 2 or more modules and DT lists several
> compatibles for a device.
>
> OK, it looks like you feel very strongly regarding having a dedicated
> compatible. In this case please make sure that the compatible's behavior
> is properly documented (i.e. google,cros-ec-keyb compatible does not
> imply that there are *NO* switches, and users having buttons and
> switches in addition to matrix keys can also use google,cros-ec-keyb as
> a compatible for their device). We also need to mention that with the
> 2nd compatible the device still can report key/button events, it is
> simply that there is no matrix component. Should we call the other
> compatible google,cros-ec-bs?

;)

I think I covered that in v3 of this series[1].

>
> We should also abort binding the device if it specifies the new
> compatible, but EC does not report any buttons or switches.

Sure. I don't have that done in v3 so I can respin the patch series to
fail probe if there aren't any switches and the cros-ec-keyb-switches
compatible is present. Can you take a quick glance at v3 and let me know
if anything else is needed?


[1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20220503042242.3597561-1-swboyd@chromium.org/