lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [Jun]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] dt-bindings: iio: bmc150_magn: Document missing compatibles
On Sat, Jun 27, 2020 at 03:57:14PM +0100, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Jun 2020 07:19:40 +0200
> Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> > On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 04:40:49PM +0100, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> > > On Wed, 17 Jun 2020 12:12:59 +0200
> > > Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > > The driver supports also BMC156B and BMM150B so document the compatibles
> > > > for these devices.
> > > >
> > > > Fixes: 9d75db36df14 ("iio: magn: Add support for BMM150 magnetometer")
> > > > Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>
> > > >
> > > > ---
> > > >
> > > > The fixes tag is not accurate but at least offer some backporting.
> > >
> > > I'm not sure we generally bother backporting a missing section of binding
> > > documentation. Particularly as this doc isn't in yaml yet so it's not
> > > as though any automated checking is likely to be occurring.
> > >
> > > Rob, any views on backporting this sort of missing id addition?
> > >
> > > One side comment here is that the devices that are magnetometers only
> > > should never have had the _magn prefix in their compatibles. We only
> > > do that for devices in incorporating several sensors in one package
> > > (like the bmc150) where we have multiple drivers for the different
> > > sensors incorporated. We are too late to fix that now though. It
> > > may make sense to mark the _magn variants deprecated though and
> > > add the ones without the _magn postfix.
> >
> > I can add proper compatibles and mark these as deprecated but actually
> > the driver should not have additional compatibles in first place - all
> > devices are just compatible with bosch,bmc150.
>
> Why not? Whilst the devices may be compatible in theory, it's not unusual
> for subtle differences to emerge later. As such we tend to at least
> support the most specific compatible possible for a part - though we
> can use fallback compatibles.

It does not strictly harm but have in mind that adding is always
possible (when you spot the difference between devices). But it is
entirely different with removal - it takes time to deprecate one and to
remove it.

There is just no benefit for adding new compatibles for really
compatible devices. The module device table just grows. It makes sense
however to document in bindings that given compatible serves family of
devices.

Somehow driver developers got impression that they need to make a commit
like "Add support for xyz123 device" adding only compatible, to bring
support for new device. But the support was already there so just
document that xyz001 is compatible with xyz123.

Best regards,
Krzysztof

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-06-29 23:01    [W:0.080 / U:0.364 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site