From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BE59E32E150; Thu, 5 Feb 2026 20:43:37 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1770324217; cv=none; b=n1mwHZap/KMs2fFcwp+310mcZJTwNQ4t6z6kU0M47HkUnBXOVKJOcyXS4dRaCzWo545tc+wUFIw8/53INb4wejMcyCX/IeZKN7jmHgQnxlnSByzHp+vZGt/OwMU7odRcxd3JQkFyQQcEPqWQAFc2Keyj75cx+crJueLcr80nCPo= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1770324217; c=relaxed/simple; bh=ArlLdx5klo5Fz+xESBh+NecS50HSyTzLBI1HSgmTJCI=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=lnPUEQOGsw2EHVOfoHUV5t/wkpNTajyDUWczWKO/uZHyKhc7F9r+A72WLLhoewA2lkd9xwTLig2V8Tp/JlBDuLyH7Dbn1OsX+OBTU2x9ws5KkvTPnn8ZWtI96oVudS3tnXmY1gi9Pa81bbQtdJpRaSOmJGT7QlEfInjgagDlEdQ= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=lTnrv2TB; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="lTnrv2TB" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 82342C4CEF7; Thu, 5 Feb 2026 20:43:32 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1770324217; bh=ArlLdx5klo5Fz+xESBh+NecS50HSyTzLBI1HSgmTJCI=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=lTnrv2TBwDREZTg7hxEVZ4HzBOBxMcqIxtfQhhevihNRWcHLttsYZLL0TkEeaWnZ4 AGaPSaCjB/I4uXXMBQYUTpmYppgGvglymQbL3XUxHpM4RwY8F94fxoGi7DVyjnoFEr b/YM4RYF3QpyMx/nJecudoadK4twFJsDQoPdgsR5XUI3sEFua/UXYm6w20AzEZV5fw DSQ1oV0IIbfn376D959R2Uezq4KCSW6TBc4R49dks2dySEXDtBw+0TY2+/9+d4N4IW 4gM2M5zdvwzz5BQY4pApY//I3xFPncUO8Ks5GA7ePARiH5GE6+n4i38a8lkpHtNlkp qU1us5oJGoAoQ== Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2026 20:43:25 +0000 From: Jonathan Cameron To: Andy Shevchenko Cc: Oleksij Rempel , Rob Herring , Krzysztof Kozlowski , Conor Dooley , kernel@pengutronix.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-iio@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, Andy Shevchenko , David Lechner , Nuno =?UTF-8?B?U8Oh?= , David Jander Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 06/13] iio: dac: ds4424: use device match data for chip info Message-ID: <20260205204325.5bd09d97@jic23-huawei> In-Reply-To: References: <20260203093434.2548978-1-o.rempel@pengutronix.de> <20260203093434.2548978-7-o.rempel@pengutronix.de> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 4.3.1 (GTK 3.24.51; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Tue, 3 Feb 2026 16:56:00 +0200 Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Tue, Feb 03, 2026 at 01:00:02PM +0100, Oleksij Rempel wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 03, 2026 at 01:51:23PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > > On Tue, Feb 03, 2026 at 11:17:42AM +0100, Oleksij Rempel wrote: > > > > On Tue, Feb 03, 2026 at 12:03:23PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > > > > On Tue, Feb 03, 2026 at 10:34:26AM +0100, Oleksij Rempel wrote: > > ... > > > > > > > - indio_dev->name = id->name; > > > > > > > > > > > + indio_dev->name = client->name; > > > > > > > > > > Isn't this an ABI breakage? > > > > > > > > I can't confirm it. > > > > > > > > before all patches: > > > > root@DistroKit:~ cat /sys/bus/iio/devices/iio:device3/name > > > > ds4424 > > > > > > > > after: > > > > root@DistroKit:~ cat /sys/bus/iio/devices/iio:device3/name > > > > ds4424 > > > > > > In ACPI case it might look differently, but I have no means to test this. > > > > > > id->name comes strictly from an i2c table, while client->name is constructed > > > using specifics of the firmware enumeration. In DT due to some (historical?) > > > reasons the client->name has no vendor substring and hence matches 1:1 to > > > id->name. In ACPI, IIRC, the client->name is ACPI device instance name, > > > something like ABCD0123:00. > > > > Ok, I see. Should I revert this line? > > Just do not introduce that change (change of the ->name field) in the original > patch, in that case no revert churn would be needed. > I think this got dealt with in discussion of next version but safest route is just have an extra copy of the name in the chip_info structure. Then we know it's stable against different firmware types etc. The few places we have client->name are all ancient bugs that are really hard to fix years later without risk :( Jonathan