RE: [PATCH 1/3] dt-bings: net: fsl,fec: update compatible item

[Wei Fang]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: 2022年8月19日 14:32
> To: Peng Fan <peng.fan@xxxxxxx>; Wei Fang <wei.fang@xxxxxxx>; Shawn
> Guo <shawnguo@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; edumazet@xxxxxxxxxx; kuba@xxxxxxxxxx;
> pabeni@xxxxxxxxxx; robh+dt@xxxxxxxxxx; krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@xxxxxxxxxx;
> s.hauer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; netdev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; festevam@xxxxxxxxx;
> dl-linux-imx <linux-imx@xxxxxxx>; Jacky Bai <ping.bai@xxxxxxx>;
> sudeep.holla@xxxxxxx; linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Aisheng Dong
> <aisheng.dong@xxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] dt-bings: net: fsl,fec: update compatible item
> 
> On 19/08/2022 06:13, Peng Fan wrote:
> >>>
> >> Sorry, I did not explain clearly last time, I just mentioned that
> >> imx8ulp fec was totally reused from imx6ul and was a little different from
> imx6q.
> >> So what should I do next? Should I fix the binding doc ?
> >
> > Just my understanding, saying i.MX6Q supports feature A, i.MX6UL
> > support feature A + B, Then i.MX6UL is compatible with i.MX6Q.
> 
> Or if i.MX8ULP can bind with any previous compatible and still work (with
> limited subset of features).
> 
> >
> > If upper is true from hardware level, then i.MX8ULP FEC node should
> > contain 8ulp, 6ul, 6q.
> >
> > But the list may expand too long if more and more devices are
> > supported and hardware backward compatible
> 
> True. I guess three items is the limit and anything newer should restart the
> sequence.
> 

So, the binding doc doesn't need to be fixed ?