Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-160000-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:4601:e00::3 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:4601:e00::3;
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20240425074835.760134-1-patrick.delaunay@foss.st.com>
 <20240425163035.GA2783061-robh@kernel.org> <28aeb8b1-72f1-4dd9-b433-f5b693150475@foss.st.com>
In-Reply-To: <28aeb8b1-72f1-4dd9-b433-f5b693150475@foss.st.com>
From: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2024 07:51:40 -0500
Message-ID: <CAL_Jsq+KGd2tumATzhJu0aZDZ0C1k9VGm5_xxTiE1RE2KHs0hA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] ARM: st: use a correct pwr compatible for stm32mp15
To: Patrick DELAUNAY <patrick.delaunay@foss.st.com>
Cc: Alexandre TORGUE <alexandre.torgue@foss.st.com>, Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@gmail.com>, 
	Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@kernel.org>, 
	Conor Dooley <conor+dt@kernel.org>, Maxime Coquelin <mcoquelin.stm32@gmail.com>, 
	Olivier Moysan <olivier.moysan@foss.st.com>, 
	Arnaud Pouliquen <arnaud.pouliquen@foss.st.com>, Pascal Paillet <p.paillet@foss.st.com>, 
	devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, 
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-stm32@st-md-mailman.stormreply.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Fri, Apr 26, 2024 at 6:42=E2=80=AFAM Patrick DELAUNAY
<patrick.delaunay@foss.st.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On 4/25/24 18:30, Rob Herring wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 25, 2024 at 09:48:31AM +0200, Patrick Delaunay wrote:
> >> This patchset removes the unexpected comma in the PWR compatible
> >> "st,stm32mp1,pwr-reg" and uses a new compatible "st,stm32mp1-pwr-reg"
> >> in STM3MP15 device trees.
> > Why? I don't see any warnings from this. Yes, we wouldn't new cases
> > following this pattern, but I don't think it is worth maintaining
> > support for both strings. We're stuck with it. And the only way to
> > maintain forward compatibility is:
>
>
> Yes, no warning because the compatible string are not yet checked by tool=
s.

What do you mean? There's a schema for it, so it is checked. I ran the
tools and there's no warning. If there was a warning, I'd fix the
tools in this case.

> I propose this patch to avoid the usage of this compatible for other SoC
> in STM32MP1 family.
>
>
> I see the invalid compatible string when I reviewed the U-Boot patch to
> add the PWR node for STM32MP13 family:
>
> https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/uboot/patch/20240319024534.103299-1-=
marex@denx.de/
>

Perhaps you should add SoC specific compatible string instead.

> So I prefer change the PWR binding before to have the same patch applied
> on Linux device tree
>
> > compatible =3D "st,stm32mp1-pwr-reg", "st,stm32mp1,pwr-reg";
>
>
> Yes, I will update the SoC patch with you proposal.

NO! We don't want to support that.

We have *tons* of examples in DT which don't follow recommended
patterns and we're stuck with them. This is no different. We can get
away with changing node names, but that's about it.

Rob