Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-191066-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:45d1:ec00::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:45d1:ec00::1;
Message-ID: <61a1be10-7df3-4ba7-b7b4-ccc7f0379656@baylibre.com>
Date: Mon, 27 May 2024 17:25:35 +0200
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/6] dt-bindings: thermal: mediatek: Rename thermal
 zone definitions for MT8186 and MT8188
To: Conor Dooley <conor@kernel.org>
Cc: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@kernel.org>,
 Conor Dooley <conor+dt@kernel.org>, Matthias Brugger
 <matthias.bgg@gmail.com>,
 AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <angelogioacchino.delregno@collabora.com>,
 Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>,
 Nicolas Pitre <npitre@baylibre.com>, "Rafael J. Wysocki"
 <rafael@kernel.org>, Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>,
 Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com>, devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
 linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org
References: <20240524-mtk-thermal-mt818x-dtsi-v5-0-56f8579820e7@baylibre.com>
 <20240524-mtk-thermal-mt818x-dtsi-v5-1-56f8579820e7@baylibre.com>
 <20240524-concerned-fritter-262f5e16293e@spud>
 <20240524-clatter-antivirus-b1939900ee58@spud>
Content-Language: en-US
From: Julien Panis <jpanis@baylibre.com>
In-Reply-To: <20240524-clatter-antivirus-b1939900ee58@spud>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On 5/24/24 20:27, Conor Dooley wrote:
> On Fri, May 24, 2024 at 07:24:47PM +0100, Conor Dooley wrote:
>> On Fri, May 24, 2024 at 11:04:34AM +0200, Julien Panis wrote:
>>> Use thermal zone names that make more sense.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Julien Panis <jpanis@baylibre.com>
>> Removing the defines is an ABI break. If these are all the same devices,
>> but with more accurate naming, then keep the old defines and add new
>> ones. However, the GPU1 define changes in the course of this patch which
>> is more problematic.
>>> [RFC] When PATCH 1/6 and 2/6 are squashed, checkpatch raises this WARNING:
>>> "DT binding docs and includes should be a separate patch." That's why I
>>> split them in this v5. The problem is that the driver can't be compiled
>>> any more at PATCH 1/6. It needs PATCH 2/6 to be compiled. Should the
>>> checkpatch warning be ignored here ? Should I finally squash PATCH 1/6
>>> and PATCH 2/6 ?
> Heh, and there's just one of the issues caused by your ABI break...

Conor,

Would Russell's suggestion be acceptable for you ?
I mean, this one:
https://lore.kernel.org/all/ZlDMNkdE2jmFgD8B@shell.armlinux.org.uk/

I could implement it, but before submitting it I would like to make
sure that it suits everyone.

Julien

>
>> Why do these names even make more sense? Where did the old names come
>> from and where do the new?
>
> Thanks,
> Conor