Message-ID: <af063274-97a1-f72d-f93e-a34dfa23570b@linaro.org>
Date:   Thu, 16 Feb 2023 12:04:52 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/102.7.1
Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/16] dt-bindings: PCI: Rename the term elbi to appl
Content-Language: en-US
To:     Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>, Shradha Todi <shradha.t@samsung.com>
Cc:     lpieralisi@kernel.org, kw@linux.com, bhelgaas@google.com,
        krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org, alim.akhtar@samsung.com,
        jingoohan1@gmail.com, Sergey.Semin@baikalelectronics.ru,
        lukas.bulwahn@gmail.com, hongxing.zhu@nxp.com, tglx@linutronix.de,
        m.szyprowski@samsung.com, jh80.chung@samsung.co,
        pankaj.dubey@samsung.com, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org,
        devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
        linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
References: <20230214121333.1837-1-shradha.t@samsung.com>
 <CGME20230214121424epcas5p38e74b52a2d94a32b82a093c7e0a12499@epcas5p3.samsung.com>
 <20230214121333.1837-6-shradha.t@samsung.com>
 <20230214191516.GA17421-robh@kernel.org>
From:   Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>
In-Reply-To: <20230214191516.GA17421-robh@kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On 14/02/2023 20:15, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 14, 2023 at 05:43:22PM +0530, Shradha Todi wrote:
>> DT uses the name elbi in reg-names for application logic
>> registers which is a wrong nomenclature. This patch fixes
>> the same.
>>
>> This commit shouldn't be applied without changes
>> "arm64: dts: Rename the term elbi to appl" and
>> "PCI: samsung: Rename the term elbi to appl"
> 
> Which is your clue that this is an ABI break. You're stuck with the old 
> name unless the ABI break is fine for all Samsung platforms using this.

This piece is quite stable so even without many out-of-tree users, we
shouldn't break it without valid reason. Wrong nomenclature is not
necessarily valid enough.

Best regards,
Krzysztof