[PATCH 00/17] dt-bindings: samsung: add specific compatibles for existing SoC
Hi,
Merging ======= I propose to take entire patchset through my tree (Samsung SoC), because: 1. Next cycle two new SoCs will be coming (Google GS101 and ExynosAutov920), so they will touch the same lines in some of the DT bindings (not all, though). It is reasonable for me to take the bindings for the new SoCs, to have clean `make dtbs_check` on the new DTS. 2. Having it together helps me to have clean `make dtbs_check` within my tree on the existing DTS. 3. No drivers are affected by this change. 4. I plan to do the same for Tesla FSD and Exynos ARM32 SoCs, thus expect follow up patchsets.
If folks agree, please kindly Ack the patches.
Description =========== Samsung Exynos SoCs reuse several devices from older designs, thus historically we kept the old (block's) compatible only. This works fine and there is no bug here, however guidelines expressed in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/writing-bindings.rst state that: 1. Compatibles should be specific. 2. We should add new compatibles in case of bugs or features.
Add compatibles specific to each SoC in front of all old-SoC-like compatibles. This will also help reviews of new code using existing DTS as template. No functional impact on Linux drivers behavior.
Future ====== If reasonable, I will do similar work for Tesla FSD and ARMv7/ARM32 Exynos bindings and DTS.
Best regards, Krzysztof
Krzysztof Kozlowski (17): dt-bindings: hwinfo: samsung,exynos-chipid: add specific compatibles for existing SoC dt-bindings: i2c: exynos5: add specific compatibles for existing SoC dt-bindings: i2c: samsung,s3c2410-i2c: add specific compatibles for existing SoC dt-bindings: mmc: samsung,exynos-dw-mshc: add specific compatibles for existing SoC dt-bindings: pinctrl: samsung: add specific compatibles for existing SoC dt-bindings: rtc: s3c-rtc: add specific compatibles for existing SoC dt-bindings: serial: samsung: add specific compatibles for existing SoC dt-bindings: samsung: exynos-pmu: add specific compatibles for existing SoC dt-bindings: gpu: arm,mali-midgard: add specific compatibles for existing Exynos SoC dt-bindings: iio: samsung,exynos-adc: add specific compatibles for existing SoC ASoC: dt-bindings: samsung-i2s: add specific compatibles for existing SoC dt-bindings: pwm: samsung: add specific compatibles for existing SoC arm64: dts: exynos5433: add specific compatibles to several blocks arm64: dts: exynos7: add specific compatibles to several blocks arm64: dts: exynos7885: add specific compatibles to several blocks arm64: dts: exynos850: add specific compatibles to several blocks arm64: dts: exynosautov9: add specific compatibles to several blocks
.../bindings/gpu/arm,mali-midgard.yaml | 5 ++ .../hwinfo/samsung,exynos-chipid.yaml | 17 +++++- .../devicetree/bindings/i2c/i2c-exynos5.yaml | 10 +++- .../bindings/i2c/samsung,s3c2410-i2c.yaml | 22 ++++--- .../bindings/iio/adc/samsung,exynos-adc.yaml | 29 +++++---- .../mfd/samsung,exynos5433-lpass.yaml | 2 +- .../bindings/mmc/samsung,exynos-dw-mshc.yaml | 25 +++++--- .../samsung,pinctrl-wakeup-interrupt.yaml | 24 +++++--- .../bindings/pinctrl/samsung,pinctrl.yaml | 3 +- .../devicetree/bindings/pwm/pwm-samsung.yaml | 2 + .../devicetree/bindings/rtc/s3c-rtc.yaml | 5 ++ .../bindings/serial/samsung_uart.yaml | 14 ++++- .../bindings/soc/samsung/exynos-pmu.yaml | 6 ++ .../bindings/soc/samsung/exynos-usi.yaml | 2 +- .../bindings/sound/samsung-i2s.yaml | 19 +++--- arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/exynos5433.dtsi | 60 ++++++++++++------- arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/exynos7.dtsi | 18 +++--- arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/exynos7885.dtsi | 45 +++++++++----- arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/exynos850.dtsi | 34 ++++++----- arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/exynosautov9.dtsi | 6 +- 20 files changed, 233 insertions(+), 115 deletions(-)
Samsung Exynos SoC reuses several devices from older designs, thus historically we kept the old (block's) compatible only. This works fine and there is no bug here, however guidelines expressed in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/writing-bindings.rst state that: 1. Compatibles should be specific. 2. We should add new compatibles in case of bugs or features.
Add compatibles specific to each SoC in front of all old-SoC-like compatibles.
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org
---
I propose to take the patch through Samsung SoC (me). See cover letter for explanation. --- .../bindings/hwinfo/samsung,exynos-chipid.yaml | 17 ++++++++++++++--- 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/hwinfo/samsung,exynos-chipid.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/hwinfo/samsung,exynos-chipid.yaml index 95cbdcb56efe..45f3d468db7c 100644 --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/hwinfo/samsung,exynos-chipid.yaml +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/hwinfo/samsung,exynos-chipid.yaml @@ -11,9 +11,20 @@ maintainers:
properties: compatible: - enum: - - samsung,exynos4210-chipid - - samsung,exynos850-chipid + oneOf: + - enum: + - samsung,exynos4210-chipid + - samsung,exynos850-chipid + - items: + - enum: + - samsung,exynos5433-chipid + - samsung,exynos7-chipid + - const: samsung,exynos4210-chipid + - items: + - enum: + - samsung,exynos7885-chipid + - samsung,exynosautov9-chipid + - const: samsung,exynos850-chipid
reg: maxItems: 1
On Wed, 08 Nov 2023 11:43:27 +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
Samsung Exynos SoC reuses several devices from older designs, thus historically we kept the old (block's) compatible only. This works fine and there is no bug here, however guidelines expressed in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/writing-bindings.rst state that:
- Compatibles should be specific.
- We should add new compatibles in case of bugs or features.
Add compatibles specific to each SoC in front of all old-SoC-like compatibles.
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org
I propose to take the patch through Samsung SoC (me). See cover letter for explanation.
.../bindings/hwinfo/samsung,exynos-chipid.yaml | 17 ++++++++++++++--- 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
Acked-by: Rob Herring robh@kernel.org
-----Original Message----- From: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org Sent: Wednesday, November 8, 2023 4:13 PM To: David Airlie airlied@gmail.com; Daniel Vetter daniel@ffwll.ch; Maarten Lankhorst maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com; Maxime Ripard mripard@kernel.org; Thomas Zimmermann tzimmermann@suse.de; Rob Herring robh+dt@kernel.org; Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org; Conor Dooley conor+dt@kernel.org; Alim Akhtar alim.akhtar@samsung.com; Andi Shyti andi.shyti@kernel.org; Jonathan Cameron jic23@kernel.org; Lars- Peter Clausen lars@metafoo.de; Lee Jones lee@kernel.org; Ulf Hansson ulf.hansson@linaro.org; Tomasz Figa tomasz.figa@gmail.com; Sylwester Nawrocki s.nawrocki@samsung.com; Linus Walleij linus.walleij@linaro.org; Thierry Reding thierry.reding@gmail.com; Uwe Kleine-König u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de; Alessandro Zummo a.zummo@towertech.it; Alexandre Belloni alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com; Greg Kroah-Hartman gregkh@linuxfoundation.org; Jiri Slaby jirislaby@kernel.org; Liam Girdwood lgirdwood@gmail.com; Mark Brown broonie@kernel.org; Jaehoon Chung jh80.chung@samsung.com; Sam Protsenko semen.protsenko@linaro.org; dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org; devicetree@vger.kernel.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; linux-arm- kernel@lists.infradead.org; linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org; linux- i2c@vger.kernel.org; linux-iio@vger.kernel.org; linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org; linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org; linux-pwm@vger.kernel.org; linux- rtc@vger.kernel.org; linux-serial@vger.kernel.org; alsa-devel@alsa- project.org; linux-sound@vger.kernel.org Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org Subject: [PATCH 01/17] dt-bindings: hwinfo: samsung,exynos-chipid: add specific compatibles for existing SoC
Samsung Exynos SoC reuses several devices from older designs, thus historically we kept the old (block's) compatible only. This works fine and there is no bug here, however guidelines expressed in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/writing-bindings.rst state that:
- Compatibles should be specific.
- We should add new compatibles in case of bugs or features.
Add compatibles specific to each SoC in front of all old-SoC-like compatibles.
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org
Reviewed-by: Alim Akhtar alim.akhtar@samsung.com
I propose to take the patch through Samsung SoC (me). See cover letter for explanation.
.../bindings/hwinfo/samsung,exynos-chipid.yaml | 17 ++++++++++++++--- 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/hwinfo/samsung,exynos- chipid.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/hwinfo/samsung,exynos-chipid.yaml index 95cbdcb56efe..45f3d468db7c 100644 --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/hwinfo/samsung,exynos- chipid.yaml +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/hwinfo/samsung,exynos- chipid.yam +++ l @@ -11,9 +11,20 @@ maintainers:
properties: compatible:
- enum:
- samsung,exynos4210-chipid- samsung,exynos850-chipid
oneOf:
- enum:- samsung,exynos4210-chipid- samsung,exynos850-chipid- items:- enum:- samsung,exynos5433-chipid- samsung,exynos7-chipid- const: samsung,exynos4210-chipid- items:- enum:- samsung,exynos7885-chipid- samsung,exynosautov9-chipid- const: samsung,exynos850-chipidreg: maxItems: 1
-- 2.34.1
Samsung Exynos SoC reuses several devices from older designs, thus historically we kept the old (block's) compatible only. This works fine and there is no bug here, however guidelines expressed in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/writing-bindings.rst state that: 1. Compatibles should be specific. 2. We should add new compatibles in case of bugs or features.
Add compatibles specific to each SoC in front of all old-SoC-like compatibles.
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org
---
I propose to take the patch through Samsung SoC (me). See cover letter for explanation. --- Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/i2c-exynos5.yaml | 10 +++++++++- .../devicetree/bindings/soc/samsung/exynos-usi.yaml | 2 +- 2 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/i2c-exynos5.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/i2c-exynos5.yaml index 3e52a0db6c41..c1f5d2cb7709 100644 --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/i2c-exynos5.yaml +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/i2c-exynos5.yaml @@ -25,7 +25,15 @@ properties: - samsung,exynos5250-hsi2c # Exynos5250 and Exynos5420 - samsung,exynos5260-hsi2c # Exynos5260 - samsung,exynos7-hsi2c # Exynos7 - - samsung,exynosautov9-hsi2c # ExynosAutoV9 and Exynos850 + - samsung,exynosautov9-hsi2c + - items: + - enum: + - samsung,exynos5433-hsi2c + - const: samsung,exynos7-hsi2c + - items: + - enum: + - samsung,exynos850-hsi2c + - const: samsung,exynosautov9-hsi2c - const: samsung,exynos5-hsi2c # Exynos5250 and Exynos5420 deprecated: true
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/samsung/exynos-usi.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/samsung/exynos-usi.yaml index a6836904a4f8..5b7ab69546c4 100644 --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/samsung/exynos-usi.yaml +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/samsung/exynos-usi.yaml @@ -155,7 +155,7 @@ examples: };
hsi2c_0: i2c@13820000 { - compatible = "samsung,exynosautov9-hsi2c"; + compatible = "samsung,exynos850-hsi2c", "samsung,exynosautov9-hsi2c"; reg = <0x13820000 0xc0>; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 227 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; #address-cells = <1>;
-----Original Message----- From: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org Sent: Wednesday, November 8, 2023 4:13 PM To: David Airlie airlied@gmail.com; Daniel Vetter daniel@ffwll.ch; Maarten Lankhorst maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com; Maxime Ripard mripard@kernel.org; Thomas Zimmermann tzimmermann@suse.de; Rob Herring robh+dt@kernel.org; Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org; Conor Dooley conor+dt@kernel.org; Alim Akhtar alim.akhtar@samsung.com; Andi Shyti andi.shyti@kernel.org; Jonathan Cameron jic23@kernel.org; Lars- Peter Clausen lars@metafoo.de; Lee Jones lee@kernel.org; Ulf Hansson ulf.hansson@linaro.org; Tomasz Figa tomasz.figa@gmail.com; Sylwester Nawrocki s.nawrocki@samsung.com; Linus Walleij linus.walleij@linaro.org; Thierry Reding thierry.reding@gmail.com; Uwe Kleine-König u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de; Alessandro Zummo a.zummo@towertech.it; Alexandre Belloni alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com; Greg Kroah-Hartman gregkh@linuxfoundation.org; Jiri Slaby jirislaby@kernel.org; Liam Girdwood lgirdwood@gmail.com; Mark Brown broonie@kernel.org; Jaehoon Chung jh80.chung@samsung.com; Sam Protsenko semen.protsenko@linaro.org; dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org; devicetree@vger.kernel.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; linux-arm- kernel@lists.infradead.org; linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org; linux- i2c@vger.kernel.org; linux-iio@vger.kernel.org; linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org; linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org; linux-pwm@vger.kernel.org; linux- rtc@vger.kernel.org; linux-serial@vger.kernel.org; alsa-devel@alsa- project.org; linux-sound@vger.kernel.org Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org Subject: [PATCH 02/17] dt-bindings: i2c: exynos5: add specific compatibles for existing SoC
Samsung Exynos SoC reuses several devices from older designs, thus historically we kept the old (block's) compatible only. This works fine and there is no bug here, however guidelines expressed in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/writing-bindings.rst state that:
- Compatibles should be specific.
- We should add new compatibles in case of bugs or features.
Add compatibles specific to each SoC in front of all old-SoC-like compatibles.
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org
I propose to take the patch through Samsung SoC (me). See cover letter for explanation.
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/i2c-exynos5.yaml | 10 +++++++++- .../devicetree/bindings/soc/samsung/exynos-usi.yaml | 2 +- 2 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/i2c-exynos5.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/i2c-exynos5.yaml index 3e52a0db6c41..c1f5d2cb7709 100644 --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/i2c-exynos5.yaml +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/i2c-exynos5.yaml @@ -25,7 +25,15 @@ properties: - samsung,exynos5250-hsi2c # Exynos5250 and Exynos5420 - samsung,exynos5260-hsi2c # Exynos5260 - samsung,exynos7-hsi2c # Exynos7
- samsung,exynosautov9-hsi2c # ExynosAutoV9 and Exynos850
- samsung,exynosautov9-hsi2c- items:- enum:- samsung,exynos5433-hsi2c- const: samsung,exynos7-hsi2c- items:- enum:- samsung,exynos850-hsi2c
Does this need an entry in allOf:? to indicate exynos850 also has 2 clocks?
- const: samsung,exynosautov9-hsi2c - const: samsung,exynos5-hsi2c # Exynos5250 and Exynos5420 deprecated: truediff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/samsung/exynos- usi.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/samsung/exynos- usi.yaml index a6836904a4f8..5b7ab69546c4 100644 --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/samsung/exynos-usi.yaml +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/samsung/exynos-usi.yaml @@ -155,7 +155,7 @@ examples: };
hsi2c_0: i2c@13820000 {
compatible = "samsung,exynosautov9-hsi2c";
compatible = "samsung,exynos850-hsi2c",- "samsung,exynosautov9-hsi2c"; reg = <0x13820000 0xc0>; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 227 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; #address-cells = <1>;
-- 2.34.1
On 09/11/2023 19:05, Alim Akhtar wrote:
(...)
Please trim unrelated parts of response/quote before and after your message.
@@ -25,7 +25,15 @@ properties: - samsung,exynos5250-hsi2c # Exynos5250 and Exynos5420 - samsung,exynos5260-hsi2c # Exynos5260 - samsung,exynos7-hsi2c # Exynos7
- samsung,exynosautov9-hsi2c # ExynosAutoV9 and Exynos850
- samsung,exynosautov9-hsi2c- items:- enum:- samsung,exynos5433-hsi2c- const: samsung,exynos7-hsi2c- items:- enum:- samsung,exynos850-hsi2cDoes this need an entry in allOf:? to indicate exynos850 also has 2 clocks?
No, autov9 is there already.
- const: samsung,exynosautov9-hsi2c
Best regards, Krzysztof
On Wed, Nov 08, 2023 at 11:43:28AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
Samsung Exynos SoC reuses several devices from older designs, thus historically we kept the old (block's) compatible only. This works fine and there is no bug here, however guidelines expressed in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/writing-bindings.rst state that:
- Compatibles should be specific.
- We should add new compatibles in case of bugs or features.
Add compatibles specific to each SoC in front of all old-SoC-like compatibles.
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org
I propose to take the patch through Samsung SoC (me). See cover letter for explanation.
I am fine that you take it once all review comments are addressed. Given that:
Acked-by: Wolfram Sang wsa@kernel.org
On Wed, 08 Nov 2023 11:43:28 +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
Samsung Exynos SoC reuses several devices from older designs, thus historically we kept the old (block's) compatible only. This works fine and there is no bug here, however guidelines expressed in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/writing-bindings.rst state that:
- Compatibles should be specific.
- We should add new compatibles in case of bugs or features.
Add compatibles specific to each SoC in front of all old-SoC-like compatibles.
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org
I propose to take the patch through Samsung SoC (me). See cover letter for explanation.
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/i2c-exynos5.yaml | 10 +++++++++- .../devicetree/bindings/soc/samsung/exynos-usi.yaml | 2 +- 2 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
Acked-by: Rob Herring robh@kernel.org
Samsung Exynos SoC reuses several devices from older designs, thus historically we kept the old (block's) compatible only. This works fine and there is no bug here, however guidelines expressed in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/writing-bindings.rst state that: 1. Compatibles should be specific. 2. We should add new compatibles in case of bugs or features.
Add compatibles specific to each SoC in front of all old-SoC-like compatibles.
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org
---
I propose to take the patch through Samsung SoC (me). See cover letter for explanation. --- .../bindings/i2c/samsung,s3c2410-i2c.yaml | 22 ++++++++++++------- 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/samsung,s3c2410-i2c.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/samsung,s3c2410-i2c.yaml index b204e35e4f8d..1303502cf265 100644 --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/samsung,s3c2410-i2c.yaml +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/samsung,s3c2410-i2c.yaml @@ -11,14 +11,20 @@ maintainers:
properties: compatible: - enum: - - samsung,s3c2410-i2c - - samsung,s3c2440-i2c - # For s3c2440-like I2C used inside HDMIPHY block found on several SoCs: - - samsung,s3c2440-hdmiphy-i2c - # For s3c2440-like I2C used as a host to SATA PHY controller on an - # internal bus: - - samsung,exynos5-sata-phy-i2c + oneOf: + - enum: + - samsung,s3c2410-i2c + - samsung,s3c2440-i2c + # For s3c2440-like I2C used inside HDMIPHY block found on several SoCs: + - samsung,s3c2440-hdmiphy-i2c + # For s3c2440-like I2C used as a host to SATA PHY controller on an + # internal bus: + - samsung,exynos5-sata-phy-i2c + - items: + - enum: + - samsung,exynos7885-i2c + - samsung,exynos850-i2c + - const: samsung,s3c2440-i2c
'#address-cells': const: 1
On Wed, Nov 08, 2023 at 11:43:29AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
Samsung Exynos SoC reuses several devices from older designs, thus historically we kept the old (block's) compatible only. This works fine and there is no bug here, however guidelines expressed in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/writing-bindings.rst state that:
- Compatibles should be specific.
- We should add new compatibles in case of bugs or features.
Add compatibles specific to each SoC in front of all old-SoC-like compatibles.
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org
I propose to take the patch through Samsung SoC (me). See cover letter for explanation.
I am fine that you take it once all review comments are addressed. Given that:
Acked-by: Wolfram Sang wsa@kernel.org
On Wed, Nov 8, 2023 at 11:44 AM Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org wrote:
Samsung Exynos SoC reuses several devices from older designs, thus historically we kept the old (block's) compatible only. This works fine and there is no bug here, however guidelines expressed in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/writing-bindings.rst state that:
- Compatibles should be specific.
- We should add new compatibles in case of bugs or features.
Add compatibles specific to each SoC in front of all old-SoC-like compatibles.
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org
Makes perfect sense to me: Reviewed-by: Linus Walleij linus.walleij@linaro.org
Yours, Linus Walleij
On Wed, Nov 08, 2023 at 11:43:29AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
Samsung Exynos SoC reuses several devices from older designs, thus historically we kept the old (block's) compatible only. This works fine and there is no bug here, however guidelines expressed in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/writing-bindings.rst state that:
- Compatibles should be specific.
- We should add new compatibles in case of bugs or features.
Add compatibles specific to each SoC in front of all old-SoC-like compatibles.
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org
I propose to take the patch through Samsung SoC (me). See cover letter for explanation.
.../bindings/i2c/samsung,s3c2410-i2c.yaml | 22 ++++++++++++------- 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
Acked-by: Rob Herring robh@kernel.org
-----Original Message----- From: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org Sent: Wednesday, November 8, 2023 4:13 PM Samsung Exynos SoC reuses several devices from older designs, thus historically we kept the old (block's) compatible only. This works fine and there is no bug here, however guidelines expressed in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/writing-bindings.rst state that:
- Compatibles should be specific.
- We should add new compatibles in case of bugs or features.
Add compatibles specific to each SoC in front of all old-SoC-like compatibles.
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org
Reviewed-by: Alim Akhtar alim.akhtar@samsung.com
I propose to take the patch through Samsung SoC (me). See cover letter for explanation.
.../bindings/i2c/samsung,s3c2410-i2c.yaml | 22 ++++++++++++------- 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
(...)
Samsung Exynos SoC reuses several devices from older designs, thus historically we kept the old (block's) compatible only. This works fine and there is no bug here, however guidelines expressed in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/writing-bindings.rst state that: 1. Compatibles should be specific. 2. We should add new compatibles in case of bugs or features.
Add compatibles specific to each SoC in front of all old-SoC-like compatibles.
While re-indenting the first enum, put also axis,artpec8-dw-mshc in alphabetical order.
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org
---
I propose to take the patch through Samsung SoC (me). See cover letter for explanation. --- .../bindings/mmc/samsung,exynos-dw-mshc.yaml | 25 ++++++++++++------- 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mmc/samsung,exynos-dw-mshc.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mmc/samsung,exynos-dw-mshc.yaml index 6ee78a38bd74..5fe65795f796 100644 --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mmc/samsung,exynos-dw-mshc.yaml +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mmc/samsung,exynos-dw-mshc.yaml @@ -14,15 +14,22 @@ maintainers:
properties: compatible: - enum: - - samsung,exynos4210-dw-mshc - - samsung,exynos4412-dw-mshc - - samsung,exynos5250-dw-mshc - - samsung,exynos5420-dw-mshc - - samsung,exynos5420-dw-mshc-smu - - samsung,exynos7-dw-mshc - - samsung,exynos7-dw-mshc-smu - - axis,artpec8-dw-mshc + oneOf: + - enum: + - axis,artpec8-dw-mshc + - samsung,exynos4210-dw-mshc + - samsung,exynos4412-dw-mshc + - samsung,exynos5250-dw-mshc + - samsung,exynos5420-dw-mshc + - samsung,exynos5420-dw-mshc-smu + - samsung,exynos7-dw-mshc + - samsung,exynos7-dw-mshc-smu + - items: + - enum: + - samsung,exynos5433-dw-mshc-smu + - samsung,exynos7885-dw-mshc-smu + - samsung,exynos850-dw-mshc-smu + - const: samsung,exynos7-dw-mshc-smu
reg: maxItems: 1
On Wed, 08 Nov 2023 11:43:30 +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
Samsung Exynos SoC reuses several devices from older designs, thus historically we kept the old (block's) compatible only. This works fine and there is no bug here, however guidelines expressed in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/writing-bindings.rst state that:
- Compatibles should be specific.
- We should add new compatibles in case of bugs or features.
Add compatibles specific to each SoC in front of all old-SoC-like compatibles.
While re-indenting the first enum, put also axis,artpec8-dw-mshc in alphabetical order.
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org
I propose to take the patch through Samsung SoC (me). See cover letter for explanation.
.../bindings/mmc/samsung,exynos-dw-mshc.yaml | 25 ++++++++++++------- 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
Acked-by: Rob Herring robh@kernel.org
-----Original Message----- From: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org Sent: Wednesday, November 8, 2023 4:14 PM
(...)
Samsung Exynos SoC reuses several devices from older designs, thus historically we kept the old (block's) compatible only. This works fine and there is no bug here, however guidelines expressed in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/writing-bindings.rst state that:
- Compatibles should be specific.
- We should add new compatibles in case of bugs or features.
Add compatibles specific to each SoC in front of all old-SoC-like compatibles.
While re-indenting the first enum, put also axis,artpec8-dw-mshc in alphabetical order.
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org
Reviewed-by: Alim Akhtar alim.akhtar@samsung.com
I propose to take the patch through Samsung SoC (me). See cover letter for explanation.
.../bindings/mmc/samsung,exynos-dw-mshc.yaml | 25 ++++++++++++------
1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
(...)
On Wed, 8 Nov 2023 at 11:44, Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org wrote:
Samsung Exynos SoC reuses several devices from older designs, thus historically we kept the old (block's) compatible only. This works fine and there is no bug here, however guidelines expressed in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/writing-bindings.rst state that:
- Compatibles should be specific.
- We should add new compatibles in case of bugs or features.
Add compatibles specific to each SoC in front of all old-SoC-like compatibles.
While re-indenting the first enum, put also axis,artpec8-dw-mshc in alphabetical order.
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org
Acked-by: Ulf Hansson ulf.hansson@linaro.org
Kind regards Uffe
I propose to take the patch through Samsung SoC (me). See cover letter for explanation.
.../bindings/mmc/samsung,exynos-dw-mshc.yaml | 25 ++++++++++++------- 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mmc/samsung,exynos-dw-mshc.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mmc/samsung,exynos-dw-mshc.yaml index 6ee78a38bd74..5fe65795f796 100644 --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mmc/samsung,exynos-dw-mshc.yaml +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mmc/samsung,exynos-dw-mshc.yaml @@ -14,15 +14,22 @@ maintainers:
properties: compatible:
- enum:
- samsung,exynos4210-dw-mshc- samsung,exynos4412-dw-mshc- samsung,exynos5250-dw-mshc- samsung,exynos5420-dw-mshc- samsung,exynos5420-dw-mshc-smu- samsung,exynos7-dw-mshc- samsung,exynos7-dw-mshc-smu- axis,artpec8-dw-mshc
oneOf:
- enum:- axis,artpec8-dw-mshc- samsung,exynos4210-dw-mshc- samsung,exynos4412-dw-mshc- samsung,exynos5250-dw-mshc- samsung,exynos5420-dw-mshc- samsung,exynos5420-dw-mshc-smu- samsung,exynos7-dw-mshc- samsung,exynos7-dw-mshc-smu- items:- enum:- samsung,exynos5433-dw-mshc-smu- samsung,exynos7885-dw-mshc-smu- samsung,exynos850-dw-mshc-smu- const: samsung,exynos7-dw-mshc-smureg: maxItems: 1
-- 2.34.1
Samsung Exynos SoC reuses several devices from older designs, thus historically we kept the old (block's) compatible only. This works fine and there is no bug here, however guidelines expressed in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/writing-bindings.rst state that: 1. Compatibles should be specific. 2. We should add new compatibles in case of bugs or features.
Add compatibles specific to each SoC in front of all old-SoC-like compatibles.
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org
---
I propose to take the patch through Samsung SoC (me). See cover letter for explanation. --- .../samsung,pinctrl-wakeup-interrupt.yaml | 24 ++++++++++++------- .../bindings/pinctrl/samsung,pinctrl.yaml | 3 ++- 2 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/samsung,pinctrl-wakeup-interrupt.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/samsung,pinctrl-wakeup-interrupt.yaml index 1de91a51234d..1c07af24d6cf 100644 --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/samsung,pinctrl-wakeup-interrupt.yaml +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/samsung,pinctrl-wakeup-interrupt.yaml @@ -28,15 +28,21 @@ description: |
properties: compatible: - enum: - - samsung,s3c2410-wakeup-eint - - samsung,s3c2412-wakeup-eint - - samsung,s3c64xx-wakeup-eint - - samsung,s5pv210-wakeup-eint - - samsung,exynos4210-wakeup-eint - - samsung,exynos7-wakeup-eint - - samsung,exynos850-wakeup-eint - - samsung,exynosautov9-wakeup-eint + oneOf: + - enum: + - samsung,s3c2410-wakeup-eint + - samsung,s3c2412-wakeup-eint + - samsung,s3c64xx-wakeup-eint + - samsung,s5pv210-wakeup-eint + - samsung,exynos4210-wakeup-eint + - samsung,exynos7-wakeup-eint + - samsung,exynos850-wakeup-eint + - samsung,exynosautov9-wakeup-eint + - items: + - enum: + - samsung,exynos5433-wakeup-eint + - samsung,exynos7885-wakeup-eint + - const: samsung,exynos7-wakeup-eint
interrupts: description: diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/samsung,pinctrl.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/samsung,pinctrl.yaml index 26614621774a..7509dc36af93 100644 --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/samsung,pinctrl.yaml +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/samsung,pinctrl.yaml @@ -313,7 +313,8 @@ examples: pinctrl-0 = <&initial_alive>;
wakeup-interrupt-controller { - compatible = "samsung,exynos7-wakeup-eint"; + compatible = "samsung,exynos5433-wakeup-eint", + "samsung,exynos7-wakeup-eint"; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 16 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; };
On Wed, 08 Nov 2023 11:43:31 +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
Samsung Exynos SoC reuses several devices from older designs, thus historically we kept the old (block's) compatible only. This works fine and there is no bug here, however guidelines expressed in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/writing-bindings.rst state that:
- Compatibles should be specific.
- We should add new compatibles in case of bugs or features.
Add compatibles specific to each SoC in front of all old-SoC-like compatibles.
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org
I propose to take the patch through Samsung SoC (me). See cover letter for explanation.
.../samsung,pinctrl-wakeup-interrupt.yaml | 24 ++++++++++++------- .../bindings/pinctrl/samsung,pinctrl.yaml | 3 ++- 2 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
Acked-by: Rob Herring robh@kernel.org
-----Original Message----- From: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org Sent: Wednesday, November 8, 2023 4:14 PM Samsung Exynos SoC reuses several devices from older designs, thus historically we kept the old (block's) compatible only. This works fine and there is no bug here, however guidelines expressed in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/writing-bindings.rst state that:
- Compatibles should be specific.
- We should add new compatibles in case of bugs or features.
Add compatibles specific to each SoC in front of all old-SoC-like compatibles.
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org
Reviewed-by: Alim Akhtar alim.akhtar@samsung.com
I propose to take the patch through Samsung SoC (me). See cover letter for explanation.
.../samsung,pinctrl-wakeup-interrupt.yaml | 24 ++++++++++++------- .../bindings/pinctrl/samsung,pinctrl.yaml | 3 ++- 2 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
(...)
On Wed, Nov 8, 2023 at 11:44 AM Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org wrote:
Samsung Exynos SoC reuses several devices from older designs, thus historically we kept the old (block's) compatible only. This works fine and there is no bug here, however guidelines expressed in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/writing-bindings.rst state that:
- Compatibles should be specific.
- We should add new compatibles in case of bugs or features.
Add compatibles specific to each SoC in front of all old-SoC-like compatibles.
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org
This is more formally correct indeed. Reviewed-by: Linus Walleij linus.walleij@linaro.org
Yours, Linus Walleij
Samsung Exynos SoC reuses several devices from older designs, thus historically we kept the old (block's) compatible only. This works fine and there is no bug here, however guidelines expressed in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/writing-bindings.rst state that: 1. Compatibles should be specific. 2. We should add new compatibles in case of bugs or features.
Add compatibles specific to each SoC in front of all old-SoC-like compatibles.
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org
---
I propose to take the patch through Samsung SoC (me). See cover letter for explanation. --- Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/s3c-rtc.yaml | 5 +++++ 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/s3c-rtc.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/s3c-rtc.yaml index d51b236939bf..bf4e11d6dffb 100644 --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/s3c-rtc.yaml +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/s3c-rtc.yaml @@ -17,6 +17,11 @@ properties: - samsung,s3c2416-rtc - samsung,s3c2443-rtc - samsung,s3c6410-rtc + - items: + - enum: + - samsung,exynos7-rtc + - samsung,exynos850-rtc + - const: samsung,s3c6410-rtc - const: samsung,exynos3250-rtc deprecated: true
On 08/11/2023 11:43:32+0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
Samsung Exynos SoC reuses several devices from older designs, thus historically we kept the old (block's) compatible only. This works fine and there is no bug here, however guidelines expressed in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/writing-bindings.rst state that:
- Compatibles should be specific.
- We should add new compatibles in case of bugs or features.
Add compatibles specific to each SoC in front of all old-SoC-like compatibles.
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org
Acked-by: Alexandre Belloni alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com
I propose to take the patch through Samsung SoC (me). See cover letter for explanation.
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/s3c-rtc.yaml | 5 +++++ 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/s3c-rtc.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/s3c-rtc.yaml index d51b236939bf..bf4e11d6dffb 100644 --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/s3c-rtc.yaml +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/s3c-rtc.yaml @@ -17,6 +17,11 @@ properties: - samsung,s3c2416-rtc - samsung,s3c2443-rtc - samsung,s3c6410-rtc
- items:- enum:- samsung,exynos7-rtc- samsung,exynos850-rtc- const: samsung,s3c6410-rtc - const: samsung,exynos3250-rtc deprecated: true-- 2.34.1
On Wed, 08 Nov 2023 11:43:32 +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
Samsung Exynos SoC reuses several devices from older designs, thus historically we kept the old (block's) compatible only. This works fine and there is no bug here, however guidelines expressed in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/writing-bindings.rst state that:
- Compatibles should be specific.
- We should add new compatibles in case of bugs or features.
Add compatibles specific to each SoC in front of all old-SoC-like compatibles.
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org
I propose to take the patch through Samsung SoC (me). See cover letter for explanation.
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/s3c-rtc.yaml | 5 +++++ 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
Acked-by: Rob Herring robh@kernel.org
-----Original Message----- From: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org Sent: Wednesday, November 8, 2023 4:14 PM Samsung Exynos SoC reuses several devices from older designs, thus historically we kept the old (block's) compatible only. This works fine and there is no bug here, however guidelines expressed in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/writing-bindings.rst state that:
- Compatibles should be specific.
- We should add new compatibles in case of bugs or features.
Add compatibles specific to each SoC in front of all old-SoC-like compatibles.
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org
Reviewed-by: Alim Akhtar alim.akhtar@samsung.com
I propose to take the patch through Samsung SoC (me). See cover letter for explanation.
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/s3c-rtc.yaml | 5 +++++ 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
(...)
Samsung Exynos SoC reuses several devices from older designs, thus historically we kept the old (block's) compatible only. This works fine and there is no bug here, however guidelines expressed in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/writing-bindings.rst state that: 1. Compatibles should be specific. 2. We should add new compatibles in case of bugs or features.
Add compatibles specific to each SoC in front of all old-SoC-like compatibles.
Re-shuffle also the entries in compatibles, so the one-compatible-enum is the first.
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org
---
I propose to take the patch through Samsung SoC (me). See cover letter for explanation. --- .../devicetree/bindings/serial/samsung_uart.yaml | 14 +++++++++++--- 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/samsung_uart.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/samsung_uart.yaml index ac60ab1e35e3..0d0215b23ab7 100644 --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/samsung_uart.yaml +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/samsung_uart.yaml @@ -18,9 +18,6 @@ description: |+ properties: compatible: oneOf: - - items: - - const: samsung,exynosautov9-uart - - const: samsung,exynos850-uart - enum: - apple,s5l-uart - axis,artpec8-uart @@ -29,6 +26,17 @@ properties: - samsung,exynos4210-uart - samsung,exynos5433-uart - samsung,exynos850-uart + - items: + - enum: + - samsung,exynos7-uart + - const: samsung,exynos4210-uart + - items: + - enum: + - samsung,exynos7885-uart + - const: samsung,exynos5433-uart + - items: + - const: samsung,exynosautov9-uart + - const: samsung,exynos850-uart
reg: maxItems: 1
On Wed, 08 Nov 2023 11:43:33 +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
Samsung Exynos SoC reuses several devices from older designs, thus historically we kept the old (block's) compatible only. This works fine and there is no bug here, however guidelines expressed in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/writing-bindings.rst state that:
- Compatibles should be specific.
- We should add new compatibles in case of bugs or features.
Add compatibles specific to each SoC in front of all old-SoC-like compatibles.
Re-shuffle also the entries in compatibles, so the one-compatible-enum is the first.
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org
I propose to take the patch through Samsung SoC (me). See cover letter for explanation.
.../devicetree/bindings/serial/samsung_uart.yaml | 14 +++++++++++--- 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
Acked-by: Rob Herring robh@kernel.org
-----Original Message----- From: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org Sent: Wednesday, November 8, 2023 4:14 PM Samsung Exynos SoC reuses several devices from older designs, thus historically we kept the old (block's) compatible only. This works fine and there is no bug here, however guidelines expressed in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/writing-bindings.rst state that:
- Compatibles should be specific.
- We should add new compatibles in case of bugs or features.
Add compatibles specific to each SoC in front of all old-SoC-like compatibles.
Re-shuffle also the entries in compatibles, so the one-compatible-enum is the first.
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org
Reviewed-by: Alim Akhtar alim.akhtar@samsung.com
I propose to take the patch through Samsung SoC (me). See cover letter for explanation.
.../devicetree/bindings/serial/samsung_uart.yaml | 14 +++++++++++--- 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
(...)
Samsung Exynos SoC reuses several devices from older designs, thus historically we kept the old (block's) compatible only. This works fine and there is no bug here, however guidelines expressed in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/writing-bindings.rst state that: 1. Compatibles should be specific. 2. We should add new compatibles in case of bugs or features.
Add compatibles specific to each SoC in front of all old-SoC-like compatibles.
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org
---
I propose to take the patch through Samsung SoC (me). See cover letter for explanation. --- .../devicetree/bindings/soc/samsung/exynos-pmu.yaml | 6 ++++++ 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/samsung/exynos-pmu.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/samsung/exynos-pmu.yaml index e1d716df5dfa..6492e92586d9 100644 --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/samsung/exynos-pmu.yaml +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/samsung/exynos-pmu.yaml @@ -48,6 +48,12 @@ properties: - samsung,exynos850-pmu - samsung-s5pv210-pmu - const: syscon + - items: + - enum: + - samsung,exynos7885-pmu + - samsung,exynosautov9-pmu + - const: samsung,exynos7-pmu + - const: syscon - items: - enum: - samsung,exynos3250-pmu
On Wed, 08 Nov 2023 11:43:34 +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
Samsung Exynos SoC reuses several devices from older designs, thus historically we kept the old (block's) compatible only. This works fine and there is no bug here, however guidelines expressed in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/writing-bindings.rst state that:
- Compatibles should be specific.
- We should add new compatibles in case of bugs or features.
Add compatibles specific to each SoC in front of all old-SoC-like compatibles.
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org
I propose to take the patch through Samsung SoC (me). See cover letter for explanation.
.../devicetree/bindings/soc/samsung/exynos-pmu.yaml | 6 ++++++ 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
Acked-by: Rob Herring robh@kernel.org
-----Original Message----- From: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org Samsung Exynos SoC reuses several devices from older designs, thus historically we kept the old (block's) compatible only. This works fine and there is no bug here, however guidelines expressed in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/writing-bindings.rst state that:
- Compatibles should be specific.
- We should add new compatibles in case of bugs or features.
Add compatibles specific to each SoC in front of all old-SoC-like compatibles.
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org
Reviewed-by: Alim Akhtar alim.akhtar@samsung.com
I propose to take the patch through Samsung SoC (me). See cover letter for explanation.
.../devicetree/bindings/soc/samsung/exynos-pmu.yaml | 6 ++++++ 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
(...)
Samsung Exynos SoC reuses several devices from older designs, thus historically we kept the old (block's) compatible only. This works fine and there is no bug here, however guidelines expressed in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/writing-bindings.rst state that: 1. Compatibles should be specific. 2. We should add new compatibles in case of bugs or features.
Add compatibles specific to each SoC in front of all old-SoC-like compatibles.
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org
---
I propose to take the patch through Samsung SoC (me). See cover letter for explanation. --- Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpu/arm,mali-midgard.yaml | 5 +++++ 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpu/arm,mali-midgard.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpu/arm,mali-midgard.yaml index ca02baba5526..0801da33a385 100644 --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpu/arm,mali-midgard.yaml +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpu/arm,mali-midgard.yaml @@ -40,6 +40,11 @@ properties: - rockchip,rk3288-mali - samsung,exynos5433-mali - const: arm,mali-t760 + - items: + - enum: + - samsung,exynos7-mali + - const: samsung,exynos5433-mali + - const: arm,mali-t760 - items: - enum: - rockchip,rk3399-mali
On Wed, 08 Nov 2023 11:43:35 +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
Samsung Exynos SoC reuses several devices from older designs, thus historically we kept the old (block's) compatible only. This works fine and there is no bug here, however guidelines expressed in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/writing-bindings.rst state that:
- Compatibles should be specific.
- We should add new compatibles in case of bugs or features.
Add compatibles specific to each SoC in front of all old-SoC-like compatibles.
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org
I propose to take the patch through Samsung SoC (me). See cover letter for explanation.
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpu/arm,mali-midgard.yaml | 5 +++++ 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
Acked-by: Rob Herring robh@kernel.org
-----Original Message----- From: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org Sent: Wednesday, November 8, 2023 4:14 PM Samsung Exynos SoC reuses several devices from older designs, thus historically we kept the old (block's) compatible only. This works fine and there is no bug here, however guidelines expressed in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/writing-bindings.rst state that:
- Compatibles should be specific.
- We should add new compatibles in case of bugs or features.
Add compatibles specific to each SoC in front of all old-SoC-like compatibles.
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org
Reviewed-by: Alim Akhtar alim.akhtar@samsung.com
I propose to take the patch through Samsung SoC (me). See cover letter for explanation.
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpu/arm,mali-midgard.yaml | 5 +++++ 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
(...)
Samsung Exynos SoC reuses several devices from older designs, thus historically we kept the old (block's) compatible only. This works fine and there is no bug here, however guidelines expressed in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/writing-bindings.rst state that: 1. Compatibles should be specific. 2. We should add new compatibles in case of bugs or features.
Add compatibles specific to each SoC in front of all old-SoC-like compatibles.
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org
---
I propose to take the patch through Samsung SoC (me). See cover letter for explanation. --- .../bindings/iio/adc/samsung,exynos-adc.yaml | 29 +++++++++++-------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/adc/samsung,exynos-adc.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/adc/samsung,exynos-adc.yaml index 582d0a03b814..4e40f6bed5db 100644 --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/adc/samsung,exynos-adc.yaml +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/adc/samsung,exynos-adc.yaml @@ -11,18 +11,23 @@ maintainers:
properties: compatible: - enum: - - samsung,exynos-adc-v1 # Exynos5250 - - samsung,exynos-adc-v2 - - samsung,exynos3250-adc - - samsung,exynos4212-adc # Exynos4212 and Exynos4412 - - samsung,exynos7-adc - - samsung,s3c2410-adc - - samsung,s3c2416-adc - - samsung,s3c2440-adc - - samsung,s3c2443-adc - - samsung,s3c6410-adc - - samsung,s5pv210-adc + oneOf: + - enum: + - samsung,exynos-adc-v1 # Exynos5250 + - samsung,exynos-adc-v2 + - samsung,exynos3250-adc + - samsung,exynos4212-adc # Exynos4212 and Exynos4412 + - samsung,exynos7-adc + - samsung,s3c2410-adc + - samsung,s3c2416-adc + - samsung,s3c2440-adc + - samsung,s3c2443-adc + - samsung,s3c6410-adc + - samsung,s5pv210-adc + - items: + - enum: + - samsung,exynos5433-adc + - const: samsung,exynos7-adc
reg: maxItems: 1
On Wed, 08 Nov 2023 11:43:36 +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
Samsung Exynos SoC reuses several devices from older designs, thus historically we kept the old (block's) compatible only. This works fine and there is no bug here, however guidelines expressed in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/writing-bindings.rst state that:
- Compatibles should be specific.
- We should add new compatibles in case of bugs or features.
Add compatibles specific to each SoC in front of all old-SoC-like compatibles.
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org
I propose to take the patch through Samsung SoC (me). See cover letter for explanation.
.../bindings/iio/adc/samsung,exynos-adc.yaml | 29 +++++++++++-------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
Acked-by: Rob Herring robh@kernel.org
-----Original Message----- From: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org Sent: Wednesday, November 8, 2023 4:14 PM Samsung Exynos SoC reuses several devices from older designs, thus historically we kept the old (block's) compatible only. This works fine and there is no bug here, however guidelines expressed in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/writing-bindings.rst state that:
- Compatibles should be specific.
- We should add new compatibles in case of bugs or features.
Add compatibles specific to each SoC in front of all old-SoC-like compatibles.
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org
Reviewed-by: Alim Akhtar alim.akhtar@samsung.com
I propose to take the patch through Samsung SoC (me). See cover letter for explanation.
.../bindings/iio/adc/samsung,exynos-adc.yaml | 29 +++++++++++-------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
(...)
On Wed, 8 Nov 2023 11:43:36 +0100 Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org wrote:
Samsung Exynos SoC reuses several devices from older designs, thus historically we kept the old (block's) compatible only. This works fine and there is no bug here, however guidelines expressed in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/writing-bindings.rst state that:
- Compatibles should be specific.
- We should add new compatibles in case of bugs or features.
Add compatibles specific to each SoC in front of all old-SoC-like compatibles.
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org
Acked-by: Jonathan Cameron Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com
I propose to take the patch through Samsung SoC (me). See cover letter for explanation.
.../bindings/iio/adc/samsung,exynos-adc.yaml | 29 +++++++++++-------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/adc/samsung,exynos-adc.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/adc/samsung,exynos-adc.yaml index 582d0a03b814..4e40f6bed5db 100644 --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/adc/samsung,exynos-adc.yaml +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/adc/samsung,exynos-adc.yaml @@ -11,18 +11,23 @@ maintainers:
properties: compatible:
- enum:
- samsung,exynos-adc-v1 # Exynos5250- samsung,exynos-adc-v2- samsung,exynos3250-adc- samsung,exynos4212-adc # Exynos4212 and Exynos4412- samsung,exynos7-adc- samsung,s3c2410-adc- samsung,s3c2416-adc- samsung,s3c2440-adc- samsung,s3c2443-adc- samsung,s3c6410-adc- samsung,s5pv210-adc
oneOf:
- enum:- samsung,exynos-adc-v1 # Exynos5250- samsung,exynos-adc-v2- samsung,exynos3250-adc- samsung,exynos4212-adc # Exynos4212 and Exynos4412- samsung,exynos7-adc- samsung,s3c2410-adc- samsung,s3c2416-adc- samsung,s3c2440-adc- samsung,s3c2443-adc- samsung,s3c6410-adc- samsung,s5pv210-adc- items:- enum:- samsung,exynos5433-adc- const: samsung,exynos7-adcreg: maxItems: 1
Samsung Exynos SoC reuses several devices from older designs, thus historically we kept the old (block's) compatible only. This works fine and there is no bug here, however guidelines expressed in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/writing-bindings.rst state that: 1. Compatibles should be specific. 2. We should add new compatibles in case of bugs or features.
Add compatibles specific to each SoC in front of all old-SoC-like compatibles.
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org
---
I propose to take the patch through Samsung SoC (me). See cover letter for explanation. --- .../mfd/samsung,exynos5433-lpass.yaml | 2 +- .../bindings/sound/samsung-i2s.yaml | 19 ++++++++++++------- 2 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/samsung,exynos5433-lpass.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/samsung,exynos5433-lpass.yaml index b97b06848729..f154103f32cc 100644 --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/samsung,exynos5433-lpass.yaml +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/samsung,exynos5433-lpass.yaml @@ -85,7 +85,7 @@ examples: };
i2s@11440000 { - compatible = "samsung,exynos7-i2s"; + compatible = "samsung,exynos5433-i2s", "samsung,exynos7-i2s"; reg = <0x11440000 0x100>; dmas = <&adma 0>, <&adma 2>; dma-names = "tx", "rx"; diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sound/samsung-i2s.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sound/samsung-i2s.yaml index 30b3b6e9824b..f45f73b5056d 100644 --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sound/samsung-i2s.yaml +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sound/samsung-i2s.yaml @@ -44,13 +44,18 @@ properties: frequencies supported by Exynos7 I2S and 7.1 channel TDM support for playback and capture TDM (Time division multiplexing) to allow transfer of multiple channel audio data on single data line. - enum: - - samsung,s3c6410-i2s - - samsung,s5pv210-i2s - - samsung,exynos5420-i2s - - samsung,exynos7-i2s - - samsung,exynos7-i2s1 - - tesla,fsd-i2s + oneOf: + - enum: + - samsung,s3c6410-i2s + - samsung,s5pv210-i2s + - samsung,exynos5420-i2s + - samsung,exynos7-i2s + - samsung,exynos7-i2s1 + - tesla,fsd-i2s + - items: + - enum: + - samsung,exynos5433-i2s + - const: samsung,exynos7-i2s
'#address-cells': const: 1
On Wed, Nov 08, 2023 at 11:43:37AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
Samsung Exynos SoC reuses several devices from older designs, thus historically we kept the old (block's) compatible only. This works fine and there is no bug here, however guidelines expressed in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/writing-bindings.rst state that:
Acked-by: Mark Brown broonie@kernel.org
On Wed, 08 Nov 2023, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
Samsung Exynos SoC reuses several devices from older designs, thus historically we kept the old (block's) compatible only. This works fine and there is no bug here, however guidelines expressed in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/writing-bindings.rst state that:
- Compatibles should be specific.
- We should add new compatibles in case of bugs or features.
Add compatibles specific to each SoC in front of all old-SoC-like compatibles.
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org
I propose to take the patch through Samsung SoC (me). See cover letter for explanation.
.../mfd/samsung,exynos5433-lpass.yaml | 2 +- .../bindings/sound/samsung-i2s.yaml | 19 ++++++++++++------- 2 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
Acked-by: Lee Jones lee@kernel.org
On Wed, 08 Nov 2023 11:43:37 +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
Samsung Exynos SoC reuses several devices from older designs, thus historically we kept the old (block's) compatible only. This works fine and there is no bug here, however guidelines expressed in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/writing-bindings.rst state that:
- Compatibles should be specific.
- We should add new compatibles in case of bugs or features.
Add compatibles specific to each SoC in front of all old-SoC-like compatibles.
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org
I propose to take the patch through Samsung SoC (me). See cover letter for explanation.
.../mfd/samsung,exynos5433-lpass.yaml | 2 +- .../bindings/sound/samsung-i2s.yaml | 19 ++++++++++++------- 2 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
Acked-by: Rob Herring robh@kernel.org
-----Original Message----- From: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org Samsung Exynos SoC reuses several devices from older designs, thus historically we kept the old (block's) compatible only. This works fine and there is no bug here, however guidelines expressed in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/writing-bindings.rst state that:
- Compatibles should be specific.
- We should add new compatibles in case of bugs or features.
Add compatibles specific to each SoC in front of all old-SoC-like compatibles.
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org
Reviewed-by: Alim Akhtar alim.akhtar@samsung.com
I propose to take the patch through Samsung SoC (me). See cover letter for explanation.
.../mfd/samsung,exynos5433-lpass.yaml | 2 +- .../bindings/sound/samsung-i2s.yaml | 19 ++++++++++++------- 2 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
(...)
Samsung Exynos SoC reuses several devices from older designs, thus historically we kept the old (block's) compatible only. This works fine and there is no bug here, however guidelines expressed in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/writing-bindings.rst state that: 1. Compatibles should be specific. 2. We should add new compatibles in case of bugs or features.
Add compatibles specific to each SoC in front of all old-SoC-like compatibles.
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org
---
I propose to take the patch through Samsung SoC (me). See cover letter for explanation. --- Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pwm/pwm-samsung.yaml | 2 ++ 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pwm/pwm-samsung.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pwm/pwm-samsung.yaml index 2162f661ed5a..89a3875cb50a 100644 --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pwm/pwm-samsung.yaml +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pwm/pwm-samsung.yaml @@ -29,6 +29,8 @@ properties: - samsung,exynos4210-pwm # 32-bit, Exynos - items: - enum: + - samsung,exynos5433-pwm + - samsung,exynos7-pwm - samsung,exynosautov9-pwm - const: samsung,exynos4210-pwm
Hello,
On Wed, Nov 08, 2023 at 11:43:38AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
Samsung Exynos SoC reuses several devices from older designs, thus historically we kept the old (block's) compatible only. This works fine and there is no bug here, however guidelines expressed in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/writing-bindings.rst state that:
- Compatibles should be specific.
- We should add new compatibles in case of bugs or features.
Add compatibles specific to each SoC in front of all old-SoC-like compatibles.
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org
I propose to take the patch through Samsung SoC (me). See cover letter for explanation.
Fine for me
Acked-by: Uwe Kleine-König u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de
Best regards Uwe
On Wed, 08 Nov 2023 11:43:38 +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
Samsung Exynos SoC reuses several devices from older designs, thus historically we kept the old (block's) compatible only. This works fine and there is no bug here, however guidelines expressed in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/writing-bindings.rst state that:
- Compatibles should be specific.
- We should add new compatibles in case of bugs or features.
Add compatibles specific to each SoC in front of all old-SoC-like compatibles.
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org
I propose to take the patch through Samsung SoC (me). See cover letter for explanation.
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pwm/pwm-samsung.yaml | 2 ++ 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
Acked-by: Rob Herring robh@kernel.org
-----Original Message----- From: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org Sent: Wednesday, November 8, 2023 4:14 PM Samsung Exynos SoC reuses several devices from older designs, thus historically we kept the old (block's) compatible only. This works fine and there is no bug here, however guidelines expressed in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/writing-bindings.rst state that:
- Compatibles should be specific.
- We should add new compatibles in case of bugs or features.
Add compatibles specific to each SoC in front of all old-SoC-like compatibles.
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org
Reviewed-by: Alim Akhtar alim.akhtar@samsung.com
I propose to take the patch through Samsung SoC (me). See cover letter for explanation.
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pwm/pwm-samsung.yaml | 2 ++ 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
(...)
Exynos5433 reuses several devices from older designs, thus historically we kept the old (block's) compatible only. This works fine and there is no bug here, however guidelines expressed in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/writing-bindings.rst state that: 1. Compatibles should be specific. 2. We should add new compatibles in case of bugs or features.
Add compatibles specific to Exynos5433 in front of all old-SoC-like compatibles. This will also help reviews of new code using existing DTS as template. No functional impact on Linux drivers behavior.
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org --- arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/exynos5433.dtsi | 60 ++++++++++++++-------- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/exynos5433.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/exynos5433.dtsi index 91ae0462a706..7fbbec04bff0 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/exynos5433.dtsi +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/exynos5433.dtsi @@ -361,7 +361,8 @@ soc: soc@0 { ranges = <0x0 0x0 0x0 0x18000000>;
chipid@10000000 { - compatible = "samsung,exynos4210-chipid"; + compatible = "samsung,exynos5433-chipid", + "samsung,exynos4210-chipid"; reg = <0x10000000 0x100>; };
@@ -850,7 +851,8 @@ pinctrl_alive: pinctrl@10580000 { reg = <0x10580000 0x1a20>, <0x11090000 0x100>;
wakeup-interrupt-controller { - compatible = "samsung,exynos7-wakeup-eint"; + compatible = "samsung,exynos5433-wakeup-eint", + "samsung,exynos7-wakeup-eint"; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 16 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; }; }; @@ -1546,7 +1548,7 @@ spi_4: spi@14d00000 { };
adc: adc@14d10000 { - compatible = "samsung,exynos7-adc"; + compatible = "samsung,exynos5433-adc", "samsung,exynos7-adc"; reg = <0x14d10000 0x100>; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 438 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; clock-names = "adc"; @@ -1556,7 +1558,7 @@ adc: adc@14d10000 { };
i2s1: i2s@14d60000 { - compatible = "samsung,exynos7-i2s"; + compatible = "samsung,exynos5433-i2s", "samsung,exynos7-i2s"; reg = <0x14d60000 0x100>; dmas = <&pdma0 31>, <&pdma0 30>; dma-names = "tx", "rx"; @@ -1571,7 +1573,7 @@ i2s1: i2s@14d60000 { };
pwm: pwm@14dd0000 { - compatible = "samsung,exynos4210-pwm"; + compatible = "samsung,exynos5433-pwm", "samsung,exynos4210-pwm"; reg = <0x14dd0000 0x100>; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 416 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>, <GIC_SPI 417 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>, @@ -1586,7 +1588,8 @@ pwm: pwm@14dd0000 { };
hsi2c_0: i2c@14e40000 { - compatible = "samsung,exynos7-hsi2c"; + compatible = "samsung,exynos5433-hsi2c", + "samsung,exynos7-hsi2c"; reg = <0x14e40000 0x1000>; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 428 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; #address-cells = <1>; @@ -1599,7 +1602,8 @@ hsi2c_0: i2c@14e40000 { };
hsi2c_1: i2c@14e50000 { - compatible = "samsung,exynos7-hsi2c"; + compatible = "samsung,exynos5433-hsi2c", + "samsung,exynos7-hsi2c"; reg = <0x14e50000 0x1000>; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 429 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; #address-cells = <1>; @@ -1612,7 +1616,8 @@ hsi2c_1: i2c@14e50000 { };
hsi2c_2: i2c@14e60000 { - compatible = "samsung,exynos7-hsi2c"; + compatible = "samsung,exynos5433-hsi2c", + "samsung,exynos7-hsi2c"; reg = <0x14e60000 0x1000>; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 430 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; #address-cells = <1>; @@ -1625,7 +1630,8 @@ hsi2c_2: i2c@14e60000 { };
hsi2c_3: i2c@14e70000 { - compatible = "samsung,exynos7-hsi2c"; + compatible = "samsung,exynos5433-hsi2c", + "samsung,exynos7-hsi2c"; reg = <0x14e70000 0x1000>; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 431 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; #address-cells = <1>; @@ -1638,7 +1644,8 @@ hsi2c_3: i2c@14e70000 { };
hsi2c_4: i2c@14ec0000 { - compatible = "samsung,exynos7-hsi2c"; + compatible = "samsung,exynos5433-hsi2c", + "samsung,exynos7-hsi2c"; reg = <0x14ec0000 0x1000>; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 424 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; #address-cells = <1>; @@ -1651,7 +1658,8 @@ hsi2c_4: i2c@14ec0000 { };
hsi2c_5: i2c@14ed0000 { - compatible = "samsung,exynos7-hsi2c"; + compatible = "samsung,exynos5433-hsi2c", + "samsung,exynos7-hsi2c"; reg = <0x14ed0000 0x1000>; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 425 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; #address-cells = <1>; @@ -1664,7 +1672,8 @@ hsi2c_5: i2c@14ed0000 { };
hsi2c_6: i2c@14ee0000 { - compatible = "samsung,exynos7-hsi2c"; + compatible = "samsung,exynos5433-hsi2c", + "samsung,exynos7-hsi2c"; reg = <0x14ee0000 0x1000>; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 426 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; #address-cells = <1>; @@ -1677,7 +1686,8 @@ hsi2c_6: i2c@14ee0000 { };
hsi2c_7: i2c@14ef0000 { - compatible = "samsung,exynos7-hsi2c"; + compatible = "samsung,exynos5433-hsi2c", + "samsung,exynos7-hsi2c"; reg = <0x14ef0000 0x1000>; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 427 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; #address-cells = <1>; @@ -1690,7 +1700,8 @@ hsi2c_7: i2c@14ef0000 { };
hsi2c_8: i2c@14d90000 { - compatible = "samsung,exynos7-hsi2c"; + compatible = "samsung,exynos5433-hsi2c", + "samsung,exynos7-hsi2c"; reg = <0x14d90000 0x1000>; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 443 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; #address-cells = <1>; @@ -1703,7 +1714,8 @@ hsi2c_8: i2c@14d90000 { };
hsi2c_9: i2c@14da0000 { - compatible = "samsung,exynos7-hsi2c"; + compatible = "samsung,exynos5433-hsi2c", + "samsung,exynos7-hsi2c"; reg = <0x14da0000 0x1000>; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 444 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; #address-cells = <1>; @@ -1716,7 +1728,8 @@ hsi2c_9: i2c@14da0000 { };
hsi2c_10: i2c@14de0000 { - compatible = "samsung,exynos7-hsi2c"; + compatible = "samsung,exynos5433-hsi2c", + "samsung,exynos7-hsi2c"; reg = <0x14de0000 0x1000>; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 445 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; #address-cells = <1>; @@ -1729,7 +1742,8 @@ hsi2c_10: i2c@14de0000 { };
hsi2c_11: i2c@14df0000 { - compatible = "samsung,exynos7-hsi2c"; + compatible = "samsung,exynos5433-hsi2c", + "samsung,exynos7-hsi2c"; reg = <0x14df0000 0x1000>; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 446 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; #address-cells = <1>; @@ -1820,7 +1834,8 @@ usbhost_dwc3: usb@0 { };
mshc_0: mmc@15540000 { - compatible = "samsung,exynos7-dw-mshc-smu"; + compatible = "samsung,exynos5433-dw-mshc-smu", + "samsung,exynos7-dw-mshc-smu"; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 225 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; #address-cells = <1>; #size-cells = <0>; @@ -1833,7 +1848,8 @@ mshc_0: mmc@15540000 { };
mshc_1: mmc@15550000 { - compatible = "samsung,exynos7-dw-mshc-smu"; + compatible = "samsung,exynos5433-dw-mshc-smu", + "samsung,exynos7-dw-mshc-smu"; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 226 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; #address-cells = <1>; #size-cells = <0>; @@ -1846,7 +1862,8 @@ mshc_1: mmc@15550000 { };
mshc_2: mmc@15560000 { - compatible = "samsung,exynos7-dw-mshc-smu"; + compatible = "samsung,exynos5433-dw-mshc-smu", + "samsung,exynos7-dw-mshc-smu"; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 227 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; #address-cells = <1>; #size-cells = <0>; @@ -1897,7 +1914,8 @@ adma: dma-controller@11420000 { };
i2s0: i2s@11440000 { - compatible = "samsung,exynos7-i2s"; + compatible = "samsung,exynos5433-i2s", + "samsung,exynos7-i2s"; reg = <0x11440000 0x100>; dmas = <&adma 0>, <&adma 2>; dma-names = "tx", "rx";
-----Original Message----- From: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org Sent: Wednesday, November 8, 2023 4:14 PM Exynos5433 reuses several devices from older designs, thus historically we kept the old (block's) compatible only. This works fine and there is no bug here, however guidelines expressed in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/writing-bindings.rst state that:
- Compatibles should be specific.
- We should add new compatibles in case of bugs or features.
Add compatibles specific to Exynos5433 in front of all old-SoC-like compatibles. This will also help reviews of new code using existing DTS as template. No functional impact on Linux drivers behavior.
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org
Reviewed-by: Alim Akhtar alim.akhtar@samsung.com
arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/exynos5433.dtsi | 60 ++++++++++++++-------- 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)
(...)
Exynos7 reuses several devices from older designs, thus historically we kept the old (block's) compatible only. This works fine and there is no bug here, however guidelines expressed in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/writing-bindings.rst state that: 1. Compatibles should be specific. 2. We should add new compatibles in case of bugs or features.
Add compatibles specific to Exynos7 in front of all old-SoC-like compatibles. This will also help reviews of new code using existing DTS as template. No functional impact on Linux drivers behavior.
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org --- arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/exynos7.dtsi | 18 ++++++++++-------- 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/exynos7.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/exynos7.dtsi index 6ed80ddf3369..9cb6bd61262e 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/exynos7.dtsi +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/exynos7.dtsi @@ -128,7 +128,8 @@ soc: soc@0 { ranges = <0 0 0 0x18000000>;
chipid@10000000 { - compatible = "samsung,exynos4210-chipid"; + compatible = "samsung,exynos7-chipid", + "samsung,exynos4210-chipid"; reg = <0x10000000 0x100>; };
@@ -279,7 +280,7 @@ clock_fsys1: clock-controller@156e0000 { };
serial_0: serial@13630000 { - compatible = "samsung,exynos4210-uart"; + compatible = "samsung,exynos7-uart", "samsung,exynos4210-uart"; reg = <0x13630000 0x100>; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 440 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; clocks = <&clock_peric0 PCLK_UART0>, @@ -289,7 +290,7 @@ serial_0: serial@13630000 { };
serial_1: serial@14c20000 { - compatible = "samsung,exynos4210-uart"; + compatible = "samsung,exynos7-uart", "samsung,exynos4210-uart"; reg = <0x14c20000 0x100>; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 456 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; clocks = <&clock_peric1 PCLK_UART1>, @@ -299,7 +300,7 @@ serial_1: serial@14c20000 { };
serial_2: serial@14c30000 { - compatible = "samsung,exynos4210-uart"; + compatible = "samsung,exynos7-uart", "samsung,exynos4210-uart"; reg = <0x14c30000 0x100>; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 457 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; clocks = <&clock_peric1 PCLK_UART2>, @@ -309,7 +310,7 @@ serial_2: serial@14c30000 { };
serial_3: serial@14c40000 { - compatible = "samsung,exynos4210-uart"; + compatible = "samsung,exynos7-uart", "samsung,exynos4210-uart"; reg = <0x14c40000 0x100>; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 458 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; clocks = <&clock_peric1 PCLK_UART3>, @@ -539,7 +540,7 @@ pmu_system_controller: system-controller@105c0000 { };
rtc: rtc@10590000 { - compatible = "samsung,s3c6410-rtc"; + compatible = "samsung,exynos7-rtc", "samsung,s3c6410-rtc"; reg = <0x10590000 0x100>; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 355 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>, <GIC_SPI 356 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; @@ -559,7 +560,8 @@ watchdog: watchdog@101d0000 { };
gpu: gpu@14ac0000 { - compatible = "samsung,exynos5433-mali", "arm,mali-t760"; + compatible = "samsung,exynos7-mali", + "samsung,exynos5433-mali", "arm,mali-t760"; reg = <0x14ac0000 0x5000>; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 241 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>, <GIC_SPI 242 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>, @@ -619,7 +621,7 @@ adc: adc@13620000 { };
pwm: pwm@136c0000 { - compatible = "samsung,exynos4210-pwm"; + compatible = "samsung,exynos7-pwm", "samsung,exynos4210-pwm"; reg = <0x136c0000 0x100>; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 449 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>, <GIC_SPI 450 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
-----Original Message----- From: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org Exynos7 reuses several devices from older designs, thus historically we kept the old (block's) compatible only. This works fine and there is no bug here, however guidelines expressed in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/writing-bindings.rst state that:
- Compatibles should be specific.
- We should add new compatibles in case of bugs or features.
Add compatibles specific to Exynos7 in front of all old-SoC-like compatibles. This will also help reviews of new code using existing DTS as template. No functional impact on Linux drivers behavior.
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org
Reviewed-by: Alim Akhtar alim.akhtar@samsung.com
arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/exynos7.dtsi | 18 ++++++++++-------- 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
(...)
Exynos7885 reuses several devices from older designs, thus historically we kept the old (block's) compatible only. This works fine and there is no bug here, however guidelines expressed in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/writing-bindings.rst state that: 1. Compatibles should be specific. 2. We should add new compatibles in case of bugs or features.
Add compatibles specific to Exynos7885 in front of all old-SoC-like compatibles. This will also help reviews of new code using existing DTS as template. No functional impact on Linux drivers behavior.
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org --- arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/exynos7885.dtsi | 45 ++++++++++++++-------- 1 file changed, 30 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/exynos7885.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/exynos7885.dtsi index d69fc2392bd0..008228fb319a 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/exynos7885.dtsi +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/exynos7885.dtsi @@ -172,7 +172,8 @@ soc: soc@0 { ranges = <0x0 0x0 0x0 0x20000000>;
chipid@10000000 { - compatible = "samsung,exynos850-chipid"; + compatible = "samsung,exynos7885-chipid", + "samsung,exynos850-chipid"; reg = <0x10000000 0x24>; };
@@ -264,7 +265,8 @@ pinctrl_alive: pinctrl@11cb0000 { reg = <0x11cb0000 0x1000>;
wakeup-interrupt-controller { - compatible = "samsung,exynos7-wakeup-eint"; + compatible = "samsung,exynos7885-wakeup-eint", + "samsung,exynos7-wakeup-eint"; interrupt-parent = <&gic>; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 130 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; }; @@ -289,12 +291,14 @@ pinctrl_dispaud: pinctrl@148f0000 { };
pmu_system_controller: system-controller@11c80000 { - compatible = "samsung,exynos7-pmu", "syscon"; + compatible = "samsung,exynos7885-pmu", + "samsung,exynos7-pmu", "syscon"; reg = <0x11c80000 0x10000>; };
mmc_0: mmc@13500000 { - compatible = "samsung,exynos7-dw-mshc-smu"; + compatible = "samsung,exynos7885-dw-mshc-smu", + "samsung,exynos7-dw-mshc-smu"; reg = <0x13500000 0x2000>; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 146 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; #address-cells = <1>; @@ -307,7 +311,8 @@ mmc_0: mmc@13500000 { };
serial_0: serial@13800000 { - compatible = "samsung,exynos5433-uart"; + compatible = "samsung,exynos7885-uart", + "samsung,exynos5433-uart"; reg = <0x13800000 0x100>; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 246 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; pinctrl-names = "default"; @@ -320,7 +325,8 @@ serial_0: serial@13800000 { };
serial_1: serial@13810000 { - compatible = "samsung,exynos5433-uart"; + compatible = "samsung,exynos7885-uart", + "samsung,exynos5433-uart"; reg = <0x13810000 0x100>; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 247 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; pinctrl-names = "default"; @@ -333,7 +339,8 @@ serial_1: serial@13810000 { };
serial_2: serial@13820000 { - compatible = "samsung,exynos5433-uart"; + compatible = "samsung,exynos7885-uart", + "samsung,exynos5433-uart"; reg = <0x13820000 0x100>; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 279 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; pinctrl-names = "default"; @@ -346,7 +353,8 @@ serial_2: serial@13820000 { };
i2c_0: i2c@13830000 { - compatible = "samsung,s3c2440-i2c"; + compatible = "samsung,exynos7885-i2c", + "samsung,s3c2440-i2c"; reg = <0x13830000 0x100>; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 248 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; #address-cells = <1>; @@ -359,7 +367,8 @@ i2c_0: i2c@13830000 { };
i2c_1: i2c@13840000 { - compatible = "samsung,s3c2440-i2c"; + compatible = "samsung,exynos7885-i2c", + "samsung,s3c2440-i2c"; reg = <0x13840000 0x100>; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 249 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; #address-cells = <1>; @@ -372,7 +381,8 @@ i2c_1: i2c@13840000 { };
i2c_2: i2c@13850000 { - compatible = "samsung,s3c2440-i2c"; + compatible = "samsung,exynos7885-i2c", + "samsung,s3c2440-i2c"; reg = <0x13850000 0x100>; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 250 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; #address-cells = <1>; @@ -385,7 +395,8 @@ i2c_2: i2c@13850000 { };
i2c_3: i2c@13860000 { - compatible = "samsung,s3c2440-i2c"; + compatible = "samsung,exynos7885-i2c", + "samsung,s3c2440-i2c"; reg = <0x13860000 0x100>; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 251 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; #address-cells = <1>; @@ -398,7 +409,8 @@ i2c_3: i2c@13860000 { };
i2c_4: i2c@13870000 { - compatible = "samsung,s3c2440-i2c"; + compatible = "samsung,exynos7885-i2c", + "samsung,s3c2440-i2c"; reg = <0x13870000 0x100>; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 252 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; #address-cells = <1>; @@ -411,7 +423,8 @@ i2c_4: i2c@13870000 { };
i2c_5: i2c@13880000 { - compatible = "samsung,s3c2440-i2c"; + compatible = "samsung,exynos7885-i2c", + "samsung,s3c2440-i2c"; reg = <0x13880000 0x100>; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 253 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; #address-cells = <1>; @@ -424,7 +437,8 @@ i2c_5: i2c@13880000 { };
i2c_6: i2c@13890000 { - compatible = "samsung,s3c2440-i2c"; + compatible = "samsung,exynos7885-i2c", + "samsung,s3c2440-i2c"; reg = <0x13890000 0x100>; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 254 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; #address-cells = <1>; @@ -437,7 +451,8 @@ i2c_6: i2c@13890000 { };
i2c_7: i2c@11cd0000 { - compatible = "samsung,s3c2440-i2c"; + compatible = "samsung,exynos7885-i2c", + "samsung,s3c2440-i2c"; reg = <0x11cd0000 0x100>; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 255 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; #address-cells = <1>;
-----Original Message----- From: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org Sent: Wednesday, November 8, 2023 4:14 PM Exynos7885 reuses several devices from older designs, thus historically we kept the old (block's) compatible only. This works fine and there is no bug here, however guidelines expressed in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/writing-bindings.rst state that:
- Compatibles should be specific.
- We should add new compatibles in case of bugs or features.
Add compatibles specific to Exynos7885 in front of all old-SoC-like compatibles. This will also help reviews of new code using existing DTS as template. No functional impact on Linux drivers behavior.
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org
Reviewed-by: Alim Akhtar alim.akhtar@samsung.com
arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/exynos7885.dtsi | 45 ++++++++++++++-------- 1 file changed, 30 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
(...)
Exynos850 reuses several devices from older designs, thus historically we kept the old (block's) compatible only. This works fine and there is no bug here, however guidelines expressed in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/writing-bindings.rst state that: 1. Compatibles should be specific. 2. We should add new compatibles in case of bugs or features.
Add compatibles specific to Exynos850 in front of all old-SoC-like compatibles. This will also help reviews of new code using existing DTS as template. No functional impact on Linux drivers behavior.
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org --- arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/exynos850.dtsi | 34 +++++++++++++---------- 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/exynos850.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/exynos850.dtsi index 53104e65b9c6..df5ea43ebcad 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/exynos850.dtsi +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/exynos850.dtsi @@ -396,7 +396,7 @@ pinctrl_aud: pinctrl@14a60000 { };
rtc: rtc@11a30000 { - compatible = "samsung,s3c6410-rtc"; + compatible = "samsung,exynos850-rtc", "samsung,s3c6410-rtc"; reg = <0x11a30000 0x100>; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 57 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>, <GIC_SPI 58 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; @@ -406,7 +406,8 @@ rtc: rtc@11a30000 { };
mmc_0: mmc@12100000 { - compatible = "samsung,exynos7-dw-mshc-smu"; + compatible = "samsung,exynos850-dw-mshc-smu", + "samsung,exynos7-dw-mshc-smu"; reg = <0x12100000 0x2000>; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 452 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; #address-cells = <1>; @@ -419,7 +420,7 @@ mmc_0: mmc@12100000 { };
i2c_0: i2c@13830000 { - compatible = "samsung,s3c2440-i2c"; + compatible = "samsung,exynos850-i2c", "samsung,s3c2440-i2c"; reg = <0x13830000 0x100>; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 196 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; #address-cells = <1>; @@ -432,7 +433,7 @@ i2c_0: i2c@13830000 { };
i2c_1: i2c@13840000 { - compatible = "samsung,s3c2440-i2c"; + compatible = "samsung,exynos850-i2c", "samsung,s3c2440-i2c"; reg = <0x13840000 0x100>; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 197 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; #address-cells = <1>; @@ -445,7 +446,7 @@ i2c_1: i2c@13840000 { };
i2c_2: i2c@13850000 { - compatible = "samsung,s3c2440-i2c"; + compatible = "samsung,exynos850-i2c", "samsung,s3c2440-i2c"; reg = <0x13850000 0x100>; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 198 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; #address-cells = <1>; @@ -458,7 +459,7 @@ i2c_2: i2c@13850000 { };
i2c_3: i2c@13860000 { - compatible = "samsung,s3c2440-i2c"; + compatible = "samsung,exynos850-i2c", "samsung,s3c2440-i2c"; reg = <0x13860000 0x100>; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 199 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; #address-cells = <1>; @@ -471,7 +472,7 @@ i2c_3: i2c@13860000 { };
i2c_4: i2c@13870000 { - compatible = "samsung,s3c2440-i2c"; + compatible = "samsung,exynos850-i2c", "samsung,s3c2440-i2c"; reg = <0x13870000 0x100>; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 200 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; #address-cells = <1>; @@ -485,7 +486,7 @@ i2c_4: i2c@13870000 {
/* I2C_5 (also called CAM_PMIC_I2C in TRM) */ i2c_5: i2c@13880000 { - compatible = "samsung,s3c2440-i2c"; + compatible = "samsung,exynos850-i2c", "samsung,s3c2440-i2c"; reg = <0x13880000 0x100>; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 201 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; #address-cells = <1>; @@ -499,7 +500,7 @@ i2c_5: i2c@13880000 {
/* I2C_6 (also called MOTOR_I2C in TRM) */ i2c_6: i2c@13890000 { - compatible = "samsung,s3c2440-i2c"; + compatible = "samsung,exynos850-i2c", "samsung,s3c2440-i2c"; reg = <0x13890000 0x100>; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 202 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; #address-cells = <1>; @@ -640,7 +641,8 @@ usi_hsi2c_0: usi@138a00c0 { status = "disabled";
hsi2c_0: i2c@138a0000 { - compatible = "samsung,exynosautov9-hsi2c"; + compatible = "samsung,exynos850-hsi2c", + "samsung,exynosautov9-hsi2c"; reg = <0x138a0000 0xc0>; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 193 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; #address-cells = <1>; @@ -668,7 +670,8 @@ usi_hsi2c_1: usi@138b00c0 { status = "disabled";
hsi2c_1: i2c@138b0000 { - compatible = "samsung,exynosautov9-hsi2c"; + compatible = "samsung,exynos850-hsi2c", + "samsung,exynosautov9-hsi2c"; reg = <0x138b0000 0xc0>; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 194 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; #address-cells = <1>; @@ -696,7 +699,8 @@ usi_hsi2c_2: usi@138c00c0 { status = "disabled";
hsi2c_2: i2c@138c0000 { - compatible = "samsung,exynosautov9-hsi2c"; + compatible = "samsung,exynos850-hsi2c", + "samsung,exynosautov9-hsi2c"; reg = <0x138c0000 0xc0>; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 195 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; #address-cells = <1>; @@ -738,7 +742,8 @@ usi_cmgp0: usi@11d000c0 { status = "disabled";
hsi2c_3: i2c@11d00000 { - compatible = "samsung,exynosautov9-hsi2c"; + compatible = "samsung,exynos850-hsi2c", + "samsung,exynosautov9-hsi2c"; reg = <0x11d00000 0xc0>; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 62 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; #address-cells = <1>; @@ -778,7 +783,8 @@ usi_cmgp1: usi@11d200c0 { status = "disabled";
hsi2c_4: i2c@11d20000 { - compatible = "samsung,exynosautov9-hsi2c"; + compatible = "samsung,exynos850-hsi2c", + "samsung,exynosautov9-hsi2c"; reg = <0x11d20000 0xc0>; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 63 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; #address-cells = <1>;
-----Original Message----- From: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org Sent: Wednesday, November 8, 2023 4:14 PM Exynos850 reuses several devices from older designs, thus historically we kept the old (block's) compatible only. This works fine and there is no bug here, however guidelines expressed in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/writing-bindings.rst state that:
- Compatibles should be specific.
- We should add new compatibles in case of bugs or features.
Add compatibles specific to Exynos850 in front of all old-SoC-like compatibles. This will also help reviews of new code using existing DTS as template. No functional impact on Linux drivers behavior.
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org
Reviewed-by: Alim Akhtar alim.akhtar@samsung.com
arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/exynos850.dtsi | 34 +++++++++++++---------- 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
(...)
On Wed, Nov 8, 2023 at 4:44 AM Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org wrote:
Exynos850 reuses several devices from older designs, thus historically we kept the old (block's) compatible only. This works fine and there is no bug here, however guidelines expressed in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/writing-bindings.rst state that:
- Compatibles should be specific.
- We should add new compatibles in case of bugs or features.
Add compatibles specific to Exynos850 in front of all old-SoC-like compatibles. This will also help reviews of new code using existing DTS as template. No functional impact on Linux drivers behavior.
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org
Reviewed-by: Sam Protsenko semen.protsenko@linaro.org
arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/exynos850.dtsi | 34 +++++++++++++---------- 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/exynos850.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/exynos850.dtsi index 53104e65b9c6..df5ea43ebcad 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/exynos850.dtsi +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/exynos850.dtsi @@ -396,7 +396,7 @@ pinctrl_aud: pinctrl@14a60000 { };
rtc: rtc@11a30000 {
compatible = "samsung,s3c6410-rtc";
compatible = "samsung,exynos850-rtc", "samsung,s3c6410-rtc"; reg = <0x11a30000 0x100>; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 57 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>, <GIC_SPI 58 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;@@ -406,7 +406,8 @@ rtc: rtc@11a30000 { };
mmc_0: mmc@12100000 {
compatible = "samsung,exynos7-dw-mshc-smu";
compatible = "samsung,exynos850-dw-mshc-smu","samsung,exynos7-dw-mshc-smu"; reg = <0x12100000 0x2000>; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 452 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; #address-cells = <1>;@@ -419,7 +420,7 @@ mmc_0: mmc@12100000 { };
i2c_0: i2c@13830000 {
compatible = "samsung,s3c2440-i2c";
compatible = "samsung,exynos850-i2c", "samsung,s3c2440-i2c"; reg = <0x13830000 0x100>; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 196 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; #address-cells = <1>;@@ -432,7 +433,7 @@ i2c_0: i2c@13830000 { };
i2c_1: i2c@13840000 {
compatible = "samsung,s3c2440-i2c";
compatible = "samsung,exynos850-i2c", "samsung,s3c2440-i2c"; reg = <0x13840000 0x100>; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 197 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; #address-cells = <1>;@@ -445,7 +446,7 @@ i2c_1: i2c@13840000 { };
i2c_2: i2c@13850000 {
compatible = "samsung,s3c2440-i2c";
compatible = "samsung,exynos850-i2c", "samsung,s3c2440-i2c"; reg = <0x13850000 0x100>; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 198 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; #address-cells = <1>;@@ -458,7 +459,7 @@ i2c_2: i2c@13850000 { };
i2c_3: i2c@13860000 {
compatible = "samsung,s3c2440-i2c";
compatible = "samsung,exynos850-i2c", "samsung,s3c2440-i2c"; reg = <0x13860000 0x100>; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 199 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; #address-cells = <1>;@@ -471,7 +472,7 @@ i2c_3: i2c@13860000 { };
i2c_4: i2c@13870000 {
compatible = "samsung,s3c2440-i2c";
compatible = "samsung,exynos850-i2c", "samsung,s3c2440-i2c"; reg = <0x13870000 0x100>; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 200 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; #address-cells = <1>;@@ -485,7 +486,7 @@ i2c_4: i2c@13870000 {
/* I2C_5 (also called CAM_PMIC_I2C in TRM) */ i2c_5: i2c@13880000 {
compatible = "samsung,s3c2440-i2c";
compatible = "samsung,exynos850-i2c", "samsung,s3c2440-i2c"; reg = <0x13880000 0x100>; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 201 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; #address-cells = <1>;@@ -499,7 +500,7 @@ i2c_5: i2c@13880000 {
/* I2C_6 (also called MOTOR_I2C in TRM) */ i2c_6: i2c@13890000 {
compatible = "samsung,s3c2440-i2c";
compatible = "samsung,exynos850-i2c", "samsung,s3c2440-i2c"; reg = <0x13890000 0x100>; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 202 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; #address-cells = <1>;@@ -640,7 +641,8 @@ usi_hsi2c_0: usi@138a00c0 { status = "disabled";
hsi2c_0: i2c@138a0000 {
compatible = "samsung,exynosautov9-hsi2c";
compatible = "samsung,exynos850-hsi2c","samsung,exynosautov9-hsi2c"; reg = <0x138a0000 0xc0>; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 193 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; #address-cells = <1>;@@ -668,7 +670,8 @@ usi_hsi2c_1: usi@138b00c0 { status = "disabled";
hsi2c_1: i2c@138b0000 {
compatible = "samsung,exynosautov9-hsi2c";
compatible = "samsung,exynos850-hsi2c","samsung,exynosautov9-hsi2c"; reg = <0x138b0000 0xc0>; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 194 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; #address-cells = <1>;@@ -696,7 +699,8 @@ usi_hsi2c_2: usi@138c00c0 { status = "disabled";
hsi2c_2: i2c@138c0000 {
compatible = "samsung,exynosautov9-hsi2c";
compatible = "samsung,exynos850-hsi2c","samsung,exynosautov9-hsi2c"; reg = <0x138c0000 0xc0>; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 195 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; #address-cells = <1>;@@ -738,7 +742,8 @@ usi_cmgp0: usi@11d000c0 { status = "disabled";
hsi2c_3: i2c@11d00000 {
compatible = "samsung,exynosautov9-hsi2c";
compatible = "samsung,exynos850-hsi2c","samsung,exynosautov9-hsi2c"; reg = <0x11d00000 0xc0>; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 62 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; #address-cells = <1>;@@ -778,7 +783,8 @@ usi_cmgp1: usi@11d200c0 { status = "disabled";
hsi2c_4: i2c@11d20000 {
compatible = "samsung,exynosautov9-hsi2c";
compatible = "samsung,exynos850-hsi2c","samsung,exynosautov9-hsi2c"; reg = <0x11d20000 0xc0>; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 63 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; #address-cells = <1>;-- 2.34.1
ExynosAutov9 reuses several devices from older designs, thus historically we kept the old (block's) compatible only. This works fine and there is no bug here, however guidelines expressed in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/writing-bindings.rst state that: 1. Compatibles should be specific. 2. We should add new compatibles in case of bugs or features.
Add compatibles specific to ExynosAutov9 in front of all old-SoC-like compatibles. This will also help reviews of new code using existing DTS as template. No functional impact on Linux drivers behavior.
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org --- arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/exynosautov9.dtsi | 6 ++++-- 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/exynosautov9.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/exynosautov9.dtsi index b228cd7e351e..417aa56a81f6 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/exynosautov9.dtsi +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/exynosautov9.dtsi @@ -166,7 +166,8 @@ soc: soc@0 { ranges = <0x0 0x0 0x0 0x20000000>;
chipid@10000000 { - compatible = "samsung,exynos850-chipid"; + compatible = "samsung,exynosautov9-chipid", + "samsung,exynos850-chipid"; reg = <0x10000000 0x24>; };
@@ -349,7 +350,8 @@ pinctrl_peric1: pinctrl@10830000 { };
pmu_system_controller: system-controller@10460000 { - compatible = "samsung,exynos7-pmu", "syscon"; + compatible = "samsung,exynosautov9-pmu", + "samsung,exynos7-pmu", "syscon"; reg = <0x10460000 0x10000>;
reboot: syscon-reboot {
-----Original Message----- From: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org ExynosAutov9 reuses several devices from older designs, thus historically we kept the old (block's) compatible only. This works fine and there is no bug here, however guidelines expressed in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/writing-bindings.rst state that:
- Compatibles should be specific.
- We should add new compatibles in case of bugs or features.
Add compatibles specific to ExynosAutov9 in front of all old-SoC-like compatibles. This will also help reviews of new code using existing DTS as template. No functional impact on Linux drivers behavior.
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org
Reviewed-by: Alim Akhtar alim.akhtar@samsung.com
arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/exynosautov9.dtsi | 6 ++++-- 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
(...)
Hi Krzysztof
-----Original Message----- From: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org Sent: Wednesday, November 8, 2023 4:13 PM To: David Airlie airlied@gmail.com; Daniel Vetter daniel@ffwll.ch; Maarten Lankhorst maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com; Maxime Ripard mripard@kernel.org; Thomas Zimmermann tzimmermann@suse.de; Rob Herring robh+dt@kernel.org; Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org; Conor Dooley conor+dt@kernel.org; Alim Akhtar alim.akhtar@samsung.com; Andi Shyti andi.shyti@kernel.org; Jonathan Cameron jic23@kernel.org; Lars- Peter Clausen lars@metafoo.de; Lee Jones lee@kernel.org; Ulf Hansson ulf.hansson@linaro.org; Tomasz Figa tomasz.figa@gmail.com; Sylwester Nawrocki s.nawrocki@samsung.com; Linus Walleij linus.walleij@linaro.org; Thierry Reding thierry.reding@gmail.com; Uwe Kleine-König u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de; Alessandro Zummo a.zummo@towertech.it; Alexandre Belloni alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com; Greg Kroah-Hartman gregkh@linuxfoundation.org; Jiri Slaby jirislaby@kernel.org; Liam Girdwood lgirdwood@gmail.com; Mark Brown broonie@kernel.org; Jaehoon Chung jh80.chung@samsung.com; Sam Protsenko semen.protsenko@linaro.org; dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org; devicetree@vger.kernel.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; linux-arm- kernel@lists.infradead.org; linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org; linux- i2c@vger.kernel.org; linux-iio@vger.kernel.org; linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org; linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org; linux-pwm@vger.kernel.org; linux- rtc@vger.kernel.org; linux-serial@vger.kernel.org; alsa-devel@alsa- project.org; linux-sound@vger.kernel.org Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org Subject: [PATCH 00/17] dt-bindings: samsung: add specific compatibles for existing SoC
Hi,
Merging
I propose to take entire patchset through my tree (Samsung SoC), because:
- Next cycle two new SoCs will be coming (Google GS101 and
ExynosAutov920), so they will touch the same lines in some of the DT bindings (not all, though). It is reasonable for me to take the bindings for the new SoCs, to have clean `make dtbs_check` on the new DTS. 2. Having it together helps me to have clean `make dtbs_check` within my tree on the existing DTS. 3. No drivers are affected by this change. 4. I plan to do the same for Tesla FSD and Exynos ARM32 SoCs, thus expect follow up patchsets.
Sure, make sense.
If folks agree, please kindly Ack the patches.
Description
Samsung Exynos SoCs reuse several devices from older designs, thus historically we kept the old (block's) compatible only. This works fine and there is no bug here, however guidelines expressed in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/writing-bindings.rst state that:
- Compatibles should be specific.
- We should add new compatibles in case of bugs or features.
Add compatibles specific to each SoC in front of all old-SoC-like compatibles. This will also help reviews of new code using existing DTS as template. No functional impact on Linux drivers behavior.
Future
If reasonable, I will do similar work for Tesla FSD and ARMv7/ARM32 Exynos bindings and DTS.
Best regards, Krzysztof
Krzysztof Kozlowski (17): dt-bindings: hwinfo: samsung,exynos-chipid: add specific compatibles for existing SoC dt-bindings: i2c: exynos5: add specific compatibles for existing SoC dt-bindings: i2c: samsung,s3c2410-i2c: add specific compatibles for existing SoC dt-bindings: mmc: samsung,exynos-dw-mshc: add specific compatibles for existing SoC dt-bindings: pinctrl: samsung: add specific compatibles for existing SoC dt-bindings: rtc: s3c-rtc: add specific compatibles for existing SoC dt-bindings: serial: samsung: add specific compatibles for existing SoC dt-bindings: samsung: exynos-pmu: add specific compatibles for existing SoC dt-bindings: gpu: arm,mali-midgard: add specific compatibles for existing Exynos SoC dt-bindings: iio: samsung,exynos-adc: add specific compatibles for existing SoC ASoC: dt-bindings: samsung-i2s: add specific compatibles for existing SoC dt-bindings: pwm: samsung: add specific compatibles for existing SoC arm64: dts: exynos5433: add specific compatibles to several blocks arm64: dts: exynos7: add specific compatibles to several blocks arm64: dts: exynos7885: add specific compatibles to several blocks arm64: dts: exynos850: add specific compatibles to several blocks arm64: dts: exynosautov9: add specific compatibles to several blocks
.../bindings/gpu/arm,mali-midgard.yaml | 5 ++ .../hwinfo/samsung,exynos-chipid.yaml | 17 +++++- .../devicetree/bindings/i2c/i2c-exynos5.yaml | 10 +++- .../bindings/i2c/samsung,s3c2410-i2c.yaml | 22 ++++--- .../bindings/iio/adc/samsung,exynos-adc.yaml | 29 +++++---- .../mfd/samsung,exynos5433-lpass.yaml | 2 +- .../bindings/mmc/samsung,exynos-dw-mshc.yaml | 25 +++++--- .../samsung,pinctrl-wakeup-interrupt.yaml | 24 +++++--- .../bindings/pinctrl/samsung,pinctrl.yaml | 3 +- .../devicetree/bindings/pwm/pwm-samsung.yaml | 2 + .../devicetree/bindings/rtc/s3c-rtc.yaml | 5 ++ .../bindings/serial/samsung_uart.yaml | 14 ++++- .../bindings/soc/samsung/exynos-pmu.yaml | 6 ++ .../bindings/soc/samsung/exynos-usi.yaml | 2 +- .../bindings/sound/samsung-i2s.yaml | 19 +++--- arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/exynos5433.dtsi | 60 ++++++++++++------- arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/exynos7.dtsi | 18 +++--- arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/exynos7885.dtsi | 45 +++++++++----- arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/exynos850.dtsi | 34 ++++++----- arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/exynosautov9.dtsi | 6 +- 20 files changed, 233 insertions(+), 115 deletions(-)
-- 2.34.1
On Wed, 08 Nov 2023 11:43:26 +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
Merging
I propose to take entire patchset through my tree (Samsung SoC), because:
- Next cycle two new SoCs will be coming (Google GS101 and ExynosAutov920), so they will touch the same lines in some of the DT bindings (not all, though). It is reasonable for me to take the bindings for the new SoCs, to have clean `make dtbs_check` on the new DTS.
- Having it together helps me to have clean `make dtbs_check` within my tree on the existing DTS.
- No drivers are affected by this change.
- I plan to do the same for Tesla FSD and Exynos ARM32 SoCs, thus expect follow up patchsets.
[...]
Applied, thanks!
[01/17] dt-bindings: hwinfo: samsung,exynos-chipid: add specific compatibles for existing SoC https://git.kernel.org/krzk/linux/c/4be756fd983a0d91c258196b3206e9131e63d62d [02/17] dt-bindings: i2c: exynos5: add specific compatibles for existing SoC https://git.kernel.org/krzk/linux/c/9da80ed69eb150617e8c72aeb7fdb9bfc7b97fba [03/17] dt-bindings: i2c: samsung,s3c2410-i2c: add specific compatibles for existing SoC https://git.kernel.org/krzk/linux/c/c45860f6ee9b52b2e2f9b9255d93b9875e416cb0 [04/17] dt-bindings: mmc: samsung,exynos-dw-mshc: add specific compatibles for existing SoC https://git.kernel.org/krzk/linux/c/5faf7e3d35b819cfa8de971f7e8ed84552c3a676 [05/17] dt-bindings: pinctrl: samsung: add specific compatibles for existing SoC https://git.kernel.org/krzk/linux/c/3e17c66d1aa322db1d68e842089bd639a88a88bf [06/17] dt-bindings: rtc: s3c-rtc: add specific compatibles for existing SoC https://git.kernel.org/krzk/linux/c/b8029fbe90351d1fdd54dceb39b21c4062c94ce1 [07/17] dt-bindings: serial: samsung: add specific compatibles for existing SoC https://git.kernel.org/krzk/linux/c/6f52f8b78d319ba63ce7fae950d9395d376bb6bf [08/17] dt-bindings: samsung: exynos-pmu: add specific compatibles for existing SoC https://git.kernel.org/krzk/linux/c/ed856d66b8c679ec1260c3151b2f4f3202aa213b [09/17] dt-bindings: gpu: arm,mali-midgard: add specific compatibles for existing Exynos SoC https://git.kernel.org/krzk/linux/c/e47d571301460a214c6253c15ff79db20ea50389 [10/17] dt-bindings: iio: samsung,exynos-adc: add specific compatibles for existing SoC https://git.kernel.org/krzk/linux/c/bbe4d4bbacd7f11b601a0c912f3f6270558899d8 [11/17] ASoC: dt-bindings: samsung-i2s: add specific compatibles for existing SoC https://git.kernel.org/krzk/linux/c/4a559c3db839afea05dc0f471823d4401b4444fc [12/17] dt-bindings: pwm: samsung: add specific compatibles for existing SoC https://git.kernel.org/krzk/linux/c/0b549b3f74e39f7b0e787f8ffdfd2cf67c0fdc4b [13/17] arm64: dts: exynos5433: add specific compatibles to several blocks https://git.kernel.org/krzk/linux/c/e9a72a20acf7b620e48cd4e268d7c7a4d45e1930 [14/17] arm64: dts: exynos7: add specific compatibles to several blocks https://git.kernel.org/krzk/linux/c/a1c0d44441d35063b79f38120105b5f92ca40445 [15/17] arm64: dts: exynos7885: add specific compatibles to several blocks https://git.kernel.org/krzk/linux/c/050e7f7217e4d4d73dfcebfbc35b3eafbc36272a [16/17] arm64: dts: exynos850: add specific compatibles to several blocks https://git.kernel.org/krzk/linux/c/bd3623def8a93cea94a8689514e557fd4522dd53 [17/17] arm64: dts: exynosautov9: add specific compatibles to several blocks https://git.kernel.org/krzk/linux/c/2a8ff4d56ef6cb4a7b2b4025ea4366178e4e8eaf
Best regards,
On Wed, 08 Nov 2023 11:43:26 +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
Merging
I propose to take entire patchset through my tree (Samsung SoC), because:
- Next cycle two new SoCs will be coming (Google GS101 and ExynosAutov920), so they will touch the same lines in some of the DT bindings (not all, though). It is reasonable for me to take the bindings for the new SoCs, to have clean `make dtbs_check` on the new DTS.
- Having it together helps me to have clean `make dtbs_check` within my tree on the existing DTS.
- No drivers are affected by this change.
- I plan to do the same for Tesla FSD and Exynos ARM32 SoCs, thus expect follow up patchsets.
[...]
Applied, thanks!
[12/17] dt-bindings: pwm: samsung: add specific compatibles for existing SoC commit: 5d67b8f81b9d598599366214e3b2eb5f84003c9f
Best regards,
On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 06:49:23PM +0100, Thierry Reding wrote:
On Wed, 08 Nov 2023 11:43:26 +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
Merging
I propose to take entire patchset through my tree (Samsung SoC), because:
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
- Next cycle two new SoCs will be coming (Google GS101 and ExynosAutov920), so they will touch the same lines in some of the DT bindings (not all, though). It is reasonable for me to take the bindings for the new SoCs, to have clean `make dtbs_check` on the new DTS.
- Having it together helps me to have clean `make dtbs_check` within my tree on the existing DTS.
- No drivers are affected by this change.
- I plan to do the same for Tesla FSD and Exynos ARM32 SoCs, thus expect follow up patchsets.
[...]
Applied, thanks!
[12/17] dt-bindings: pwm: samsung: add specific compatibles for existing SoC commit: 5d67b8f81b9d598599366214e3b2eb5f84003c9f
You didn't honor (or even comment) Krzysztof's proposal to take the whole patchset via his tree (marked above). Was there some off-list agreement?
Best regards Uwe
On 28/11/2023 21:58, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 06:49:23PM +0100, Thierry Reding wrote:
On Wed, 08 Nov 2023 11:43:26 +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
Merging
I propose to take entire patchset through my tree (Samsung SoC), because:
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
- Next cycle two new SoCs will be coming (Google GS101 and ExynosAutov920), so they will touch the same lines in some of the DT bindings (not all, though). It is reasonable for me to take the bindings for the new SoCs, to have clean `make dtbs_check` on the new DTS.
- Having it together helps me to have clean `make dtbs_check` within my tree on the existing DTS.
- No drivers are affected by this change.
- I plan to do the same for Tesla FSD and Exynos ARM32 SoCs, thus expect follow up patchsets.
[...]
Applied, thanks!
[12/17] dt-bindings: pwm: samsung: add specific compatibles for existing SoC commit: 5d67b8f81b9d598599366214e3b2eb5f84003c9f
You didn't honor (or even comment) Krzysztof's proposal to take the whole patchset via his tree (marked above). Was there some off-list agreement?
It was also written in the PWM patch itself (under changelog ---) and expressed with my "applied" response when I took everything. I am sending now another set, also touching PWM.
Best regards, Krzysztof
On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 09:58:41PM +0100, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 06:49:23PM +0100, Thierry Reding wrote:
On Wed, 08 Nov 2023 11:43:26 +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
Merging
I propose to take entire patchset through my tree (Samsung SoC), because:
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
- Next cycle two new SoCs will be coming (Google GS101 and ExynosAutov920), so they will touch the same lines in some of the DT bindings (not all, though). It is reasonable for me to take the bindings for the new SoCs, to have clean `make dtbs_check` on the new DTS.
- Having it together helps me to have clean `make dtbs_check` within my tree on the existing DTS.
- No drivers are affected by this change.
- I plan to do the same for Tesla FSD and Exynos ARM32 SoCs, thus expect follow up patchsets.
[...]
Applied, thanks!
[12/17] dt-bindings: pwm: samsung: add specific compatibles for existing SoC commit: 5d67b8f81b9d598599366214e3b2eb5f84003c9f
You didn't honor (or even comment) Krzysztof's proposal to take the whole patchset via his tree (marked above). Was there some off-list agreement?
I had read all that and then looking at patchwork saw that you had marked all other patches in the series as "handled-elsewhere" and only this one was left as "new", so I assumed that, well, everything else was handled elsewhere and I was supposed to pick this one up...
I'll drop this one.
Thierry
Hello Thierry,
On Tue, Dec 05, 2023 at 01:36:05PM +0100, Thierry Reding wrote:
On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 09:58:41PM +0100, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 06:49:23PM +0100, Thierry Reding wrote:
On Wed, 08 Nov 2023 11:43:26 +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
Merging
I propose to take entire patchset through my tree (Samsung SoC), because:
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
- Next cycle two new SoCs will be coming (Google GS101 and ExynosAutov920), so they will touch the same lines in some of the DT bindings (not all, though). It is reasonable for me to take the bindings for the new SoCs, to have clean `make dtbs_check` on the new DTS.
- Having it together helps me to have clean `make dtbs_check` within my tree on the existing DTS.
- No drivers are affected by this change.
- I plan to do the same for Tesla FSD and Exynos ARM32 SoCs, thus expect follow up patchsets.
[...]
Applied, thanks!
[12/17] dt-bindings: pwm: samsung: add specific compatibles for existing SoC commit: 5d67b8f81b9d598599366214e3b2eb5f84003c9f
You didn't honor (or even comment) Krzysztof's proposal to take the whole patchset via his tree (marked above). Was there some off-list agreement?
I had read all that and then looking at patchwork saw that you had marked all other patches in the series as "handled-elsewhere" and only this one was left as "new", so I assumed that, well, everything else was handled elsewhere and I was supposed to pick this one up...
I didn't mark it as handled-elsewhere, but my expectation was that you might want to send an Ack only.
For today's series by Krzysztof I acked and marked the patch as handled-elsewhere (together with the rest of the series that isn't pwm related). So you have to consult your inbox if you still want to send an Ack for that one.
Best regards Uwe
participants (13)
-
Alexandre Belloni -
Alim Akhtar -
Jonathan Cameron -
Krzysztof Kozlowski -
Lee Jones -
Linus Walleij -
Mark Brown -
Rob Herring -
Sam Protsenko -
Thierry Reding -
Ulf Hansson -
Uwe Kleine-König -
Wolfram Sang