Hi Jonathan,

On Friday, 5 June 2026 13:53:32 CEST Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> On Fri, 05 Jun 2026 11:01:35 +0200
> 
> Romain Gantois <romain.gantois@bootlin.com> wrote:
> > The TMP119 has the same register layout as the TMP117, and a better local
> > sensor accuracy.
> 
> Sounds like (and the driver changes pretty much confirm) that this could
> use a fallback compatible to the tmp117.
> 

What do you mean by "fallback compatible" in this case? Do you mean we should 
do something like this in the bindings:

```
enum:
       - ti,tmp116
       - ti,tmp119
const:
       - ti,tmp117
```

But wouldn't this invalidate existing device trees which only have:

`compatible = "ti,tmp116";`

> The second patch then just resolves the print that would happen on older
> kernels using that fallback due to ID mismatch.  That's fine but nice
> if older kernels can work with this part.

Sorry I don't quite understand: since this is a feature patch, I don't expect 
it would get backported onto older kernels. Therefore why would the second 
patch resolve the print happening on older kernels?

Thanks,

-- 
Romain Gantois, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com