Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20220711082709.39102-1-krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>
 <20220711082709.39102-2-krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> <CAD=FV=W7BCMTByC9xn2iRsxoB9RzRENz5zuTy1Sgmhjbw3aQMw@mail.gmail.com>
 <6ebdb95a-6458-b77e-e14c-e89539c51b3f@linaro.org>
In-Reply-To: <6ebdb95a-6458-b77e-e14c-e89539c51b3f@linaro.org>
From:   Doug Anderson <dianders@chromium.org>
Date:   Tue, 12 Jul 2022 07:38:23 -0700
Message-ID: <CAD=FV=WGxQF4vPuRi7kWKoqTpe0RFsgH+J82C=sQbmncK_AFpw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] mmc: sdhci-msm: add MSM8998 SDCC specific compatible
To:     Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>
Cc:     Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org>,
        Andy Gross <agross@kernel.org>,
        Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@linaro.org>,
        Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@somainline.org>,
        Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>,
        Bhupesh Sharma <bhupesh.sharma@linaro.org>,
        Linux MMC List <linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org>,
        "open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS" 
        <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-arm-msm <linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

Hi,

On Mon, Jul 11, 2022 at 11:47 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski
<krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote:
>
> On 11/07/2022 17:08, Doug Anderson wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Mon, Jul 11, 2022 at 1:27 AM Krzysztof Kozlowski
> > <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> Add a MSM8998-specific SDCC compatible, because using only a generic
> >> qcom,sdhci-msm-v4 fallback is deprecated.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>
> >> ---
> >>  drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-msm.c | 1 +
> >>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-msm.c b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-msm.c
> >> index e395411fb6fd..bb169c1c2b5e 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-msm.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-msm.c
> >> @@ -2447,6 +2447,7 @@ static const struct of_device_id sdhci_msm_dt_match[] = {
> >>         {.compatible = "qcom,msm8992-sdhci", .data = &sdhci_msm_mci_var},
> >>         {.compatible = "qcom,msm8994-sdhci", .data = &sdhci_msm_mci_var},
> >>         {.compatible = "qcom,msm8996-sdhci", .data = &sdhci_msm_mci_var},
> >> +       {.compatible = "qcom,msm8998-sdhci", .data = &sdhci_msm_mci_var},
> >
> > FWIW I'm _against_ this change.
> >
> > In my mind while it is correct to specify both the specific and
> > generic compatible string in the device tree, the driver itself should
> > rely on just the generic compatible string until there is a reason to
> > use the specific one (like we needed to for sdm845 and sc7180).
> >
> > I think I pointed that out before, but somehow all of the specific
> > device tree strings have snuck their way into the driver without me
> > paying attention. :(
>
> I thought it's existing practice for some time, but it's a fresh commit
> 466614a9765c ("mmc: sdhci-msm: Add SoC specific compatibles"). I agree
> that it does not make much sense to add each compatible to the driver,
> so how about reverting 466614a9765c?

That would be my vote.

-Doug