Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-189520-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.48.161 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.48.161;
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20240522215043.3747651-1-tharvey@gateworks.com>
 <07250029-7cea-4a82-9e70-22e0e6f7fb37@linaro.org> <20240523-vividly-sequester-d85ac7bccbbd@spud>
 <CAJ+vNU3fQt=6t3a_QFU_3jb5mTVLGJiptPnGEmWvvXZYGEPOFQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20240524-cavalier-outthink-51805f49c8fb@spud> <8007abef-38bb-4d7d-a453-00bb5e6bede5@linaro.org>
In-Reply-To: <8007abef-38bb-4d7d-a453-00bb5e6bede5@linaro.org>
From: Tim Harvey <tharvey@gateworks.com>
Date: Sat, 25 May 2024 12:58:18 -0700
Message-ID: <CAJ+vNU3Rh6f-HrFbBLxNXVP1PwsGh8OyGmmGJBv6+GRwZaTXgw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: arm: fsl: rename gw7905 to gw75xx
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>
Cc: Conor Dooley <conor@kernel.org>, Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>, 
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org>, Conor Dooley <conor+dt@kernel.org>, 
	Shawn Guo <shawnguo@kernel.org>, Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@pengutronix.de>, 
	Pengutronix Kernel Team <kernel@pengutronix.de>, Fabio Estevam <festevam@gmail.com>, Li Yang <leoyang.li@nxp.com>, 
	devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, imx@lists.linux.dev, 
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Sat, May 25, 2024 at 11:34=E2=80=AFAM Krzysztof Kozlowski
<krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote:
>
> On 24/05/2024 20:40, Conor Dooley wrote:
> > On Thu, May 23, 2024 at 04:04:50PM -0700, Tim Harvey wrote:
> >> On Thu, May 23, 2024 at 7:47=E2=80=AFAM Conor Dooley <conor@kernel.org=
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, May 23, 2024 at 09:02:46AM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> >>>> On 22/05/2024 23:50, Tim Harvey wrote:
> >>>>> The GW7905 was renamed to GW7500 before production release.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Tim Harvey <tharvey@gateworks.com>
> >>>>> ---
> >>>>>  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/fsl.yaml | 4 ++--
> >>>>>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/fsl.yaml b/Docum=
entation/devicetree/bindings/arm/fsl.yaml
> >>>>> index 0027201e19f8..d8bc295079e3 100644
> >>>>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/fsl.yaml
> >>>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/fsl.yaml
> >>>>> @@ -920,8 +920,8 @@ properties:
> >>>>>                - fsl,imx8mm-ddr4-evk       # i.MX8MM DDR4 EVK Board
> >>>>>                - fsl,imx8mm-evk            # i.MX8MM EVK Board
> >>>>>                - fsl,imx8mm-evkb           # i.MX8MM EVKB Board
> >>>>> +              - gateworks,imx8mm-gw75xx-0x # i.MX8MM Gateworks Boa=
rd
> >>>>
> >>>> That's not even equivalent. You 7500 !=3D 75xx.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>>>                - gateworks,imx8mm-gw7904
> >>>>> -              - gateworks,imx8mm-gw7905-0x # i.MX8MM Gateworks Boa=
rd
> >>>>
> >>>> Compatibles do not change. It's just a string. Fixed string.
> >>>
> >>> I think there's justification here for removing it, per the commit
> >>> message, the rename happened before the device was available to
> >>> customers.
> >>> Additionally, I think we can give people that upstream things before =
they're
> >>> publicly available a bit of slack, otherwise we're just discouraging
> >>> people from upstreaming early.
> >>
> >> Hi Conor,
> >>
> >> Thanks for understanding - that's exactly what happened. I'm in the
> >> habit of submitting patches early and often and it's no fun when
> >> something like a silly product name gets changed and breaks all the
> >> hard work.
> >>
> >> The board model number is stored in an EEPROM at manufacturing time
> >> and that EEPROM model is used to build a dt name. So instead of GW7905
> >> which would be a one-off custom design it was decided to change the
> >> product to a GW75xx. The difference between GW7500 and GW75xx is
> >> because we subload components on boards between GW7500/GW7501/GW7502
> >> etc but the dt is the same.
> >>
> >> If there is resistance to a patch that renames it then I guess I'll
> >> have to submit a patch that removes the obsolete board, then adds back
> >> the same board under a different name. Shall I do that?
> >
> > I think this patch is fine - other than the inconsistency that Krzyszto=
f
> > pointed out between the "renamed to gw7500" and the "gw75xx" in the new
> > compatible.
>
> I am not a fan of renaming compatibles because of marketing change,
> because compatible does not have to reflect the marketing name, but
> there was already precedent from Qualcomm which I did not nak, so fine
> here as well. Double wildcard 75xx is however a bit worrying.
>

Hi Krzysztof,

Thanks for understanding. The double-wildcard is again a marketing
tool. All GW75** use the same device-tree by design. The boot firmware
that chooses the device-tree understands this and for a GW7521 for
example would look for gw7521 first, gw752x next, gw75xx last.

Best Regards,

Tim