| Message ID | 20230303002850.51858-9-arinc.unal@arinc9.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | pinctrl: ralink: fix ABI, improve driver, move to mediatek, improve dt-bindings | expand |
On Fri, Mar 03, 2023 at 03:28:37AM +0300, arinc9.unal@gmail.com wrote: > From: Arınç ÜNAL <arinc.unal@arinc9.com> > > Add the new mediatek compatible strings. Change the compatible string on > the examples with the mediatek compatible strings. > > Add the new compatible strings for mt7620, mt76x8, and rt305x to be able to > properly document the pin muxing information of each SoC, or SoCs that use > the same pinmux data. > > Signed-off-by: Arınç ÜNAL <arinc.unal@arinc9.com> > --- > .../devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/ralink,mt7620-pinctrl.yaml | 7 +++++-- > .../devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/ralink,mt7621-pinctrl.yaml | 6 ++++-- > .../devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/ralink,rt305x-pinctrl.yaml | 5 ++++- > 3 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/ralink,mt7620-pinctrl.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/ralink,mt7620-pinctrl.yaml > index cde6de77e228..a94d2e7a5f37 100644 > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/ralink,mt7620-pinctrl.yaml > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/ralink,mt7620-pinctrl.yaml > @@ -17,7 +17,10 @@ description: > > properties: > compatible: > - const: ralink,mt7620-pinctrl > + enum: > + - mediatek,mt7620-pinctrl > + - mediatek,mt76x8-pinctrl > + - ralink,mt7620-pinctrl To repeat the options from last time: >Carrying both strings is a NAK. Either you (and everyone using >these platforms) care about the ABI and are stuck with the "wrong" >string. In the end, they are just unique identifiers. Or you don't care >and break the ABI and rename everything. If you do that, do just that >in your patches and make it crystal clear in the commit msg that is >your intention and why that is okay. Marketing/acquistion renames was just an example and common reason. That doesn't make other reasons okay. I don't see any reason given here. If you want to break the ABI (do you??, because the commit message still doesn't say), then you don't need "ralink,mt7620-pinctrl". Rob
On 9.03.2023 00:00, Rob Herring wrote: > On Fri, Mar 03, 2023 at 03:28:37AM +0300, arinc9.unal@gmail.com wrote: >> From: Arınç ÜNAL <arinc.unal@arinc9.com> >> >> Add the new mediatek compatible strings. Change the compatible string on >> the examples with the mediatek compatible strings. >> >> Add the new compatible strings for mt7620, mt76x8, and rt305x to be able to >> properly document the pin muxing information of each SoC, or SoCs that use >> the same pinmux data. >> >> Signed-off-by: Arınç ÜNAL <arinc.unal@arinc9.com> >> --- >> .../devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/ralink,mt7620-pinctrl.yaml | 7 +++++-- >> .../devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/ralink,mt7621-pinctrl.yaml | 6 ++++-- >> .../devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/ralink,rt305x-pinctrl.yaml | 5 ++++- >> 3 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/ralink,mt7620-pinctrl.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/ralink,mt7620-pinctrl.yaml >> index cde6de77e228..a94d2e7a5f37 100644 >> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/ralink,mt7620-pinctrl.yaml >> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/ralink,mt7620-pinctrl.yaml >> @@ -17,7 +17,10 @@ description: >> >> properties: >> compatible: >> - const: ralink,mt7620-pinctrl >> + enum: >> + - mediatek,mt7620-pinctrl >> + - mediatek,mt76x8-pinctrl >> + - ralink,mt7620-pinctrl > > To repeat the options from last time: > >> Carrying both strings is a NAK. Either you (and everyone using >> these platforms) care about the ABI and are stuck with the "wrong" >> string. In the end, they are just unique identifiers. Or you don't care >> and break the ABI and rename everything. If you do that, do just that >> in your patches and make it crystal clear in the commit msg that is >> your intention and why that is okay. > > Marketing/acquistion renames was just an example and common reason. That > doesn't make other reasons okay. I don't see any reason given here. I did give the reason on patch 2 and 9 but I should've put it on this patch as well. > This platform from Ralink was acquired by MediaTek in 2011. Then, MediaTek > introduced these SoCs which utilise this platform. Add new compatible > strings to address the incorrect naming. I'm continuing the conversation regarding this under patch 9. > > If you want to break the ABI (do you??, because the commit message > still doesn't say), then you don't need "ralink,mt7620-pinctrl". I don't want to break the ABI. But I deprecate ralink,mt7620-pinctrl on later patches. The driver still has it though, so old DTs will keep working. That keeps the ABI intact regardless of deprecating strings on the dt-binding schema, right? Arınç
On 08/03/2023 22:19, Arınç ÜNAL wrote: > >> >> If you want to break the ABI (do you??, because the commit message >> still doesn't say), then you don't need "ralink,mt7620-pinctrl". > > I don't want to break the ABI. But I deprecate ralink,mt7620-pinctrl on > later patches. Deprecation should happen here. Otherwise you have now two valid compatibles which contradicts previous Rob's comments. > The driver still has it though, so old DTs will keep > working. That keeps the ABI intact regardless of deprecating strings on > the dt-binding schema, right? Yes, but deprecation is missing. Best regards, Krzysztof
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/ralink,mt7620-pinctrl.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/ralink,mt7620-pinctrl.yaml index cde6de77e228..a94d2e7a5f37 100644 --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/ralink,mt7620-pinctrl.yaml +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/ralink,mt7620-pinctrl.yaml @@ -17,7 +17,10 @@ description: properties: compatible: - const: ralink,mt7620-pinctrl + enum: + - mediatek,mt7620-pinctrl + - mediatek,mt76x8-pinctrl + - ralink,mt7620-pinctrl patternProperties: '-pins$': @@ -646,7 +649,7 @@ additionalProperties: false examples: - | pinctrl { - compatible = "ralink,mt7620-pinctrl"; + compatible = "mediatek,mt7620-pinctrl"; i2c_pins: i2c0-pins { pinmux { diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/ralink,mt7621-pinctrl.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/ralink,mt7621-pinctrl.yaml index fb8c5459ea93..eb0746cfc6d6 100644 --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/ralink,mt7621-pinctrl.yaml +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/ralink,mt7621-pinctrl.yaml @@ -17,7 +17,9 @@ description: properties: compatible: - const: ralink,mt7621-pinctrl + enum: + - mediatek,mt7621-pinctrl + - ralink,mt7621-pinctrl patternProperties: '-pins$': @@ -250,7 +252,7 @@ additionalProperties: false examples: - | pinctrl { - compatible = "ralink,mt7621-pinctrl"; + compatible = "mediatek,mt7621-pinctrl"; i2c_pins: i2c0-pins { pinmux { diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/ralink,rt305x-pinctrl.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/ralink,rt305x-pinctrl.yaml index 8b1256af09c3..23fb82f9959c 100644 --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/ralink,rt305x-pinctrl.yaml +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/ralink,rt305x-pinctrl.yaml @@ -18,7 +18,10 @@ description: properties: compatible: - const: ralink,rt305x-pinctrl + enum: + - ralink,rt305x-pinctrl + - ralink,rt3352-pinctrl + - ralink,rt5350-pinctrl patternProperties: '-pins$':