Re: [PATCH 1/3] dt-bindings: i2c: dw: Add DWC_i2c compatible

[Mika Westerberg]

On Mon, Sep 21, 2026 at 04:00:52PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 21/09/2026 13:14, Mika Westerberg wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > On Mon, Sep 21, 2026 at 01:55:23PM +0530, Aniket Limaye wrote:
> >>
> >> On 20/09/26 23:54, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> >>> On Sat, Sep 19, 2026 at 02:36:06PM +0530, Aniket Limaye wrote:
> >>>> Add the "snps,dwc-i2c" compatible for Synopsys Advanced I2C Controller
> >>>> referred as DWC_i2c. Compared to the existing "snps,designware-i2c"
> >>> dwc is designware, so snps,dwc-i2c = snps,designware-i2c
> >>>
> >>> I think this is *the* argument why generic compatibles are wrong.
> >>
> >> These are 2 different controllers with some different registers and
> >> vastly different register offsets.
> >>
> >> So, the official product name (short format) for the SNPS Advanced I2C
> >> controller is "DWC_i2c", as per SNPS' own reference document [0].
> >> Whereas the original "snps,designware-i2c" corresponds to the product
> >> name "DW_apb_i2c" as per its own databook [1].
> >>
> >> So based on this I though it'd be best to keep "dwc-i2c" close to SNPS'
> >> own naming, despite the fact that it does seem very similar to the
> >> generic "snps,designware-i2c".
> >>
> >> If you'd prefer to make it more explicit, I could change this to something
> >> like "snps,dwc-adv-i2c"? Although, again, this does deviate from the
> >> convention that SNPS uses in it's own documents.
> > 
> > What about just "snps,ai2c" or "snps,advanced-i2c"?
> 
> Can we just drop generic compatible completely instead? The block cannot
> work alone, needs SoC integration.

Works for me.