Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-35760-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:45e3:2400::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:45e3:2400::1;
Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2024 17:14:32 +0000
From: Conor Dooley <conor@kernel.org>
To: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <angelogioacchino.delregno@collabora.com>
Cc: chunfeng.yun@mediatek.com, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org,
	robh+dt@kernel.org, krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org,
	conor+dt@kernel.org, matthias.bgg@gmail.com, linux@roeck-us.net,
	heikki.krogerus@linux.intel.com, cy_huang@richtek.com,
	linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] dt-bindings: usb: mt6360-tcpc: Drop
 interrupt-names
Message-ID: <20240123-procurer-jumbo-ebbec485505d@spud>
References: <20240119094105.98312-1-angelogioacchino.delregno@collabora.com>
 <20240119-eldest-discharge-e2d3812be0a9@spud>
 <12b7b339-498b-45c1-bc5e-05e07660aefa@collabora.com>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256;
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="v/T4NYLhZdUREOS8"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <12b7b339-498b-45c1-bc5e-05e07660aefa@collabora.com>


--v/T4NYLhZdUREOS8
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Mon, Jan 22, 2024 at 11:32:30AM +0100, AngeloGioacchino Del Regno wrote:
> Il 19/01/24 17:32, Conor Dooley ha scritto:
> > On Fri, Jan 19, 2024 at 10:41:04AM +0100, AngeloGioacchino Del Regno wr=
ote:
> > > This IP has only one interrupt, hence interrupt-names is not necessary
> > > to have.
> > > Since there is no user yet, simply remove interrupt-names.
> >=20
> > I'm a bit confused chief. Patch 2 in this series removes a user of this
> > property from a driver, so can you explain how this statement is true?
> >=20
> > Maybe I need to drink a few cans of Monster and revisit this patchset?
> >=20
>=20
> What I mean with "there is no user" is that there's no device tree with a=
ny
> mt6360-tcpc node upstream yet, so there is no meaningful ABI breakage.
> Different story would be if there was a device tree using this already, in
> which case, you can make a required property optional but not remove it.

Not every devicetree lives within the kernel.. If the driver is using
it, I'm not inclined to agree that it should be removed.

--v/T4NYLhZdUREOS8
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iHUEABYIAB0WIQRh246EGq/8RLhDjO14tDGHoIJi0gUCZa/z+AAKCRB4tDGHoIJi
0lIGAQDy+QnvesimA/OIHScQAKviK34M6BooBy+5efXbpLxirgEAsWPYDApgg5q7
5GO9YGhChTlvElCUHbl0NhBDEWtLsgY=
=kCYX
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--v/T4NYLhZdUREOS8--