Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-143695-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.199.223 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.199.223;
Date: Sat, 13 Apr 2024 12:56:13 +0200
From: Lukas Wunner <lukas@wunner.de>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>
Cc: "M. Haener" <michael.haener@siemens.com>,
	linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Peter Huewe <peterhuewe@gmx.de>,
	Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@kernel.org>, Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ziepe.ca>,
	Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>,
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org>,
	Conor Dooley <conor+dt@kernel.org>,
	Alexander Sverdlin <alexander.sverdlin@siemens.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] dt-bindings: tpm: Add st,st33ktpm2xi2c to TCG TIS
 binding
Message-ID: <ZhpkzWhOdW3OaJfn@wunner.de>
References: <20240413071621.12509-1-michael.haener@siemens.com>
 <20240413071621.12509-3-michael.haener@siemens.com>
 <8c13a349-a721-44d3-9e23-2e01f4c2ca4d@linaro.org>
 <Zhpb2URMxuoilKAZ@wunner.de>
 <3d08cf54-f58f-446f-977e-21ba65986924@linaro.org>
 <ZhpfwaIUc0HpfZP1@wunner.de>
 <889ca65c-c9c7-4658-9c34-5d89774218cc@linaro.org>
 <ZhpjozjbeWrb0OTl@wunner.de>
 <bbe365cd-698e-4507-b5e6-d7dd4dcc7a75@linaro.org>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <bbe365cd-698e-4507-b5e6-d7dd4dcc7a75@linaro.org>

On Sat, Apr 13, 2024 at 12:53:25PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 13/04/2024 12:51, Lukas Wunner wrote:
> > The binding requires two entries in the compatible string used in the DT,
> > the chip name followed by the generic string:
> > 
> >         items:
> >           - enum:
> >               - infineon,slb9673
> >               - nuvoton,npct75x
> >           - const: tcg,tpm-tis-i2c
> > 
> > This allows us to deal with device-specific quirks, should they pop up
> > (e.g. special timing requirements, hardware bugs).  We don't know in
> > advance if they will be discovered, but if they are, it's cumbersome
> > to determine after the fact which products (and thus DTs) are affected.
> > So having the name of the actual chip used on the board has value.
> 
> So you say devices are compatible. Then the second patch is wrong.
> 
> I cannot respond to it, though... so NAK-here-for-second-patch.

I disagree.  It's ugly to have inconsistencies between the DT bindings
and the driver.  So I think patch [1/2] in this series is fine.

Thanks,

Lukas