Message ID | 20171221134842.31287-3-brgl@bgdev.pl |
---|---|
State | Superseded |
Delegated to: | Bartosz Golaszewski |
Headers | show |
Series | eeprom: at24: device tree support fixes | expand |
On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 3:48 PM, Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@bgdev.pl> wrote: > "atmel,spd" is reported by checkpatch as undocumented in the device > tree bindings. Add it to the list of supported compatible strings. > "atmel,24c00", > "atmel,24c01", > "atmel,24c02", > + "atmel,spd", > "atmel,24c04", > "atmel,24c08", > "atmel,24c16", Sounds alogical to me to make a split by this new record. Can you find better line to inject?
2017-12-21 15:08 GMT+01:00 Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com>: > On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 3:48 PM, Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@bgdev.pl> wrote: >> "atmel,spd" is reported by checkpatch as undocumented in the device >> tree bindings. Add it to the list of supported compatible strings. > >> "atmel,24c00", >> "atmel,24c01", >> "atmel,24c02", >> + "atmel,spd", >> "atmel,24c04", >> "atmel,24c08", >> "atmel,24c16", > > Sounds alogical to me to make a split by this new record. > Can you find better line to inject? > > -- > With Best Regards, > Andy Shevchenko They are actually ordered by memory size. I want to keep it like this in the driver and I prefer that the DT reflect it. Thanks, Bartosz
On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 4:18 PM, Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@bgdev.pl> wrote: > 2017-12-21 15:08 GMT+01:00 Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com>: >> On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 3:48 PM, Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@bgdev.pl> wrote: >>> "atmel,spd" is reported by checkpatch as undocumented in the device >>> tree bindings. Add it to the list of supported compatible strings. >> >>> "atmel,24c00", >>> "atmel,24c01", >>> "atmel,24c02", >>> + "atmel,spd", >>> "atmel,24c04", >>> "atmel,24c08", >>> "atmel,24c16", >> >> Sounds alogical to me to make a split by this new record. >> Can you find better line to inject? > They are actually ordered by memory size. I want to keep it like this > in the driver and I prefer that the DT reflect it. So, I just disagree on the above. Rationale I described at one of the comment. At the end it's your call, but from my p.o.v. it makes life harder to read and catch the chips which are (un)supported.
2017-12-21 15:25 GMT+01:00 Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com>: > On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 4:18 PM, Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@bgdev.pl> wrote: >> 2017-12-21 15:08 GMT+01:00 Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com>: >>> On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 3:48 PM, Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@bgdev.pl> wrote: >>>> "atmel,spd" is reported by checkpatch as undocumented in the device >>>> tree bindings. Add it to the list of supported compatible strings. >>> >>>> "atmel,24c00", >>>> "atmel,24c01", >>>> "atmel,24c02", >>>> + "atmel,spd", >>>> "atmel,24c04", >>>> "atmel,24c08", >>>> "atmel,24c16", >>> >>> Sounds alogical to me to make a split by this new record. >>> Can you find better line to inject? > >> They are actually ordered by memory size. I want to keep it like this >> in the driver and I prefer that the DT reflect it. > > So, I just disagree on the above. Rationale I described at one of the comment. > > At the end it's your call, but from my p.o.v. it makes life harder to > read and catch the chips which are (un)supported. > > -- > With Best Regards, > Andy Shevchenko Yes, I prefer this version. Another reason to keep it like this is to group chip variants together. E.g: atmel,24cs02, atmel,spd, atmel,24mac402, atmel,24mac602 are all variants of atmel,24c02. Thanks, Bartosz
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/eeprom/at24.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/eeprom/at24.txt index 16b687458b14..2702f2456971 100644 --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/eeprom/at24.txt +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/eeprom/at24.txt @@ -7,6 +7,7 @@ Required properties: "atmel,24c00", "atmel,24c01", "atmel,24c02", + "atmel,spd", "atmel,24c04", "atmel,24c08", "atmel,24c16",