Re: [PATCH v2 01/19] dt-bindings: display: renesas,cmm: Add R-Car CMM documentation

[Jacopo Mondi]

Hi Geert,

On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 09:53:44AM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> Hi Jacopo,
>
> On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 9:47 AM Jacopo Mondi <jacopo@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 19, 2019 at 03:45:54PM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jul 8, 2019 at 9:58 AM Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > On Sat, Jul 6, 2019 at 4:07 PM Jacopo Mondi <jacopo+renesas@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > > Add device tree bindings documentation for the Renesas R-Car Display
> > > > > Unit Color Management Module.
> > > > >
> > > > > CMM is the image enhancement module available on each R-Car DU video
> > > > > channel on R-Car Gen2 and Gen3 SoCs (V3H and V3M excluded).
> > > > >
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Jacopo Mondi <jacopo+renesas@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > Reviewed-by: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for your patch!
> > > >
> > > > > --- /dev/null
> > > > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/renesas,cmm.txt
> > > > > @@ -0,0 +1,25 @@
> > > > > +* Renesas R-Car Color Management Module (CMM)
> > > > > +
> > > > > +Renesas R-Car image enhancement module connected to R-Car DU video channels.
> > > > > +
> > > > > +Required properties:
> > > > > + - compatible: shall be one of:
> > > > > +   - "renesas,rcar-gen3-cmm"
> > > > > +   - "renesas,rcar-gen2-cmm"
> > > >
> > > > Why do you think you do not need SoC-specific compatible values?
> > > > What if you discover a different across the R-Car Gen3 line tomorrow?
> > > > Does the IP block have a version register?
> > >
> > > Do you have an answer to these questions?
> >
> > It does not seem to me that CMM has any version register, nor there
> > are differences between the different Gen3 SoCs..
> >
> > However, even if we now define a single compatible property for
> > gen3/gen2 and we later find out one of the SoC needs a soc-specific
> > property we can safely add it and keep the generic gen3/gen2 one as
> > fallback.. Does it work for you?
>
> Unfortunately that won't work, as the existing DTBs won't have the
> soc-specific compatible value.

Correct, existing dtbs won't have the soc-specific value... However,
there are functional differences between different SoCs according to
the datasheet, but if it's good practice to provide soc-specific
compatibles "just in case" I'm fine doing that..


> You could still resort to soc_device_match(), but it is better to avoid that.

I see... Also that function's documentation prescribes to go through
DT first, so I guess it's our last resort...


>
> Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
>
>                         Geert
>
> --
> Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
> when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
>                                 -- Linus Torvalds

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature