Messages in this thread |  | | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] omapdrm: fix compatible string for td028ttec1 | | From | "H. Nikolaus Schaller" <> | | Date | Thu, 16 Nov 2017 17:10:56 +0100 |
| |
Hi Andrew,
> Am 16.11.2017 um 16:53 schrieb Andrew F. Davis <afd@ti.com>: > > On 11/16/2017 07:43 AM, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote: >> >>> Am 16.11.2017 um 13:32 schrieb Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen@ti.com>: >>> >>> On 16/11/17 10:50, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote: >>>> The vendor name was "toppoly" but other panels and the vendor list >>>> have defined it as "tpo". So let's fix it in driver and bindings. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: H. Nikolaus Schaller <hns@goldelico.com> >>>> --- >>> >>> >>>> -MODULE_ALIAS("spi:toppoly,td028ttec1"); >>>> +MODULE_ALIAS("spi:tpo,td028ttec1"); >>> >>> Doesn't this mean that the module won't load if you have old bindings? >> >> Hm. >> >> Well, I think it can load but doesn't automatically from DT strings which might >> be unexpected. >> >>> Can't we have two module aliases? >> >> I think we can. Just a random example: >> https://elixir.free-electrons.com/linux/latest/source/drivers/w1/slaves/w1_therm.c#L754 >> >> So we should keep both. > > Even better would be to drop both MODULE_ALIAS and let the > MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE macro define them for your from the SPI id table.
Why would that be better?
As far as I see it will need more code and changes than adding one line of MODULE_ALIAS.
> Although it doesn't look like this driver has an SPI id table, you > should probably add one, I be interested to see if this module is always > being matched through the "spi" or the "of" alias..
Could you please propose how that code should look like, so that I can test?
BR and thanks, Nikolaus Schaller
> >> >> Should I submit a new version? >> >> BR, >> Nikolaus >> >> -- >> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in >> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org >> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html >>
|  |