Re: [PATCH 2/2] dt-bindings: thermal: mediatek: add compatible string for MT7986 SoC

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 30/11/2022 13:09, Daniel Golle wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 02, 2022 at 04:43:35PM -0400, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 31/10/2022 18:16, Daniel Golle wrote:
>>> Add compatible string 'mediatek,mt7986-thermal' for V3 thermal unit
>>> found in MT7981 and MT7986 SoCs.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Daniel Golle <daniel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> ---
>>>  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/thermal/mediatek-thermal.txt | 1 +
>>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/thermal/mediatek-thermal.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/thermal/mediatek-thermal.txt
>>> index 5c7e7bdd029abf..efc16ab5b22b5d 100644
>>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/thermal/mediatek-thermal.txt
>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/thermal/mediatek-thermal.txt
>>> @@ -13,6 +13,7 @@ Required properties:
>>>    - "mediatek,mt2701-thermal" : For MT2701 family of SoCs
>>>    - "mediatek,mt2712-thermal" : For MT2712 family of SoCs
>>>    - "mediatek,mt7622-thermal" : For MT7622 SoC
>>> +  - "mediatek,mt7986-thermal" : For MT7981 and MT7986 SoC
>>
>> Then recommended is to have specific compatible followed by fallback (so
>> 7986 followed by 7981)
> 
> I'm a bit confused about the order you are suggesting. It may seem
> counter-intuitive, but MT7986 was released before MT7981, the thermal
> units found in both SoCs seems to be exactly identical.
> Or are you suggesting to list MT7981 first to maintain alphabetical
> order? Because in terms of precedence, MT7986 has been there first, and
> hence I'd list 7986 first, followed by 7981, ie. the opposite of the
> order you were suggesting.
> 

I have no clue which came first. Choose whatever is reasonable.

Best regards,
Krzysztof