From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lelv0143.ext.ti.com (lelv0143.ext.ti.com [198.47.23.248]) (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 A5EC1385; Wed, 8 May 2024 02:33:04 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.47.23.248 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1715135586; cv=none; b=j1cTlR+0cQ5Dd5OsW3bnCaNUVczD1AGL3XMRegvb1AvR9jOxOZDrVvf6wFNObHH9vCAXL/J4j6WH/BECQXJf6pARatY4fV0EQBJSigBuBAtPjov3Fz+fq7hJtyxawlJpntnW0cilg4HQ4AHr6I5ytcsrRKc7DXtz1vU7tQp/gxc= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1715135586; c=relaxed/simple; bh=GQI3foM1aUdeD/8j61M4OYXqveWJZjDJO4QquolCYoU=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:CC:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=Sy7kImm5I/rLcnogeENGmKmpJuuwqtg8AskKa+xinLwvjfxBC++5las8ujAuz9JzIKvjScLOwFx21F6dJnpyncJ56DZy/RjMx/EJQsXoO/2qc1zoVVUgej4rOhq33AW1H0EXDLzdg4fZEs76bjRPmaHTiwrXTgRade+wAfhgrNo= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=ti.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=ti.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ti.com header.i=@ti.com header.b=GQ0Dx2Js; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.47.23.248 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=ti.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=ti.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ti.com header.i=@ti.com header.b="GQ0Dx2Js" Received: from lelv0265.itg.ti.com ([10.180.67.224]) by lelv0143.ext.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 4482WeoM059096; Tue, 7 May 2024 21:32:40 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ti.com; s=ti-com-17Q1; t=1715135560; bh=f/D3yLYXWBhynQURe0LWuItpjtu/UWwQJZrmRPe4JS0=; h=Date:Subject:To:CC:References:From:In-Reply-To; b=GQ0Dx2Js3uYQxFXGB+BldZJqEvDh7IMQQPy2gFM4GFcgiUhrnHmXkjeLucNQHDAua AvJ94QwxcQkDmRRF6fIerRv9E2nA7ipNHs6IsxU6hAfxFRcULcfw9EP4gFcDq5VEFv LDA9DXiz48Ccnhv5/OKk36cbIW7g4pTm3VEEPEp8= Received: from DFLE100.ent.ti.com (dfle100.ent.ti.com [10.64.6.21]) by lelv0265.itg.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id 4482We7G008452 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Tue, 7 May 2024 21:32:40 -0500 Received: from DFLE111.ent.ti.com (10.64.6.32) by DFLE100.ent.ti.com (10.64.6.21) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.2507.23; Tue, 7 May 2024 21:32:40 -0500 Received: from lelvsmtp5.itg.ti.com (10.180.75.250) by DFLE111.ent.ti.com (10.64.6.32) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.2507.23 via Frontend Transport; Tue, 7 May 2024 21:32:40 -0500 Received: from [172.24.227.36] (a0497641-hp-z2-tower-g9-workstation-desktop-pc.dhcp.ti.com [172.24.227.36]) by lelvsmtp5.itg.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 4482WZek088709; Tue, 7 May 2024 21:32:36 -0500 Message-ID: Date: Wed, 8 May 2024 08:02:35 +0530 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] regulator: dt-bindings: Unify compatible To: Rob Herring CC: , , , , , , , , , , , References: <20240507122158.3739291-1-n-francis@ti.com> <20240507122158.3739291-2-n-francis@ti.com> <20240507211112.GA1053164-robh@kernel.org> Content-Language: en-US From: Neha Malcom Francis In-Reply-To: <20240507211112.GA1053164-robh@kernel.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-EXCLAIMER-MD-CONFIG: e1e8a2fd-e40a-4ac6-ac9b-f7e9cc9ee180 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 >> --- >> .../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