Re: [PATCH 1/5] regulator: dt-bindings: Unify compatible

[Neha Malcom Francis <n-francis@ti.com>]

Hi Rob

On 08/05/24 02:41, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Tue, May 07, 2024 at 05:51:54PM +0530, Neha Malcom Francis wrote:
>> TPS62870/1/2/3 devices have different output currents (6A/9A/12A/15A) of
>> the TPS6287x family. The I2C addresses are the same between them. There
>> is no need for different compatibles for each for these devices so drop
>> them and add a unified "ti,tps6287x" compatible.
> 
> And s/w will never need to know what the max output current is?
> 

Not really, as per understanding from the hardware teams.

> Same i2c address has no bearing. That's usually not even fixed for 1
> device.
> 
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Neha Malcom Francis <n-francis@ti.com>
>> ---
>>   .../devicetree/bindings/regulator/ti,tps62870.yaml         | 7 ++-----
>>   1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/regulator/ti,tps62870.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/regulator/ti,tps62870.yaml
>> index 386989544dac..2998773db990 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/regulator/ti,tps62870.yaml
>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/regulator/ti,tps62870.yaml
>> @@ -15,10 +15,7 @@ allOf:
>>   properties:
>>     compatible:
>>       enum:
>> -      - ti,tps62870
>> -      - ti,tps62871
>> -      - ti,tps62872
>> -      - ti,tps62873
>> +      - ti,tps6287x
> 
> You just broke the existing users.
> 
> Wildcards in compatible names are generally discouraged. Maybe if this
> was a new binding and had sufficient justification why we don't need to
> distinguish parts, but this is an ABI and we're stuck with them.
> 
> If you are doing this to support more versions, then feel free to use
> an existing string. It's just a unique identifier. You have 4 to choose
> from.

Thanks for the review, Rob! I should have known better than to remove 
compatibles, excuse the noise!

> 
> Rob
> 

-- 
Thanking You
Neha Malcom Francis