Re: [PATCH v4 2/3] dt-bindings: input: qcom,pm8xxx-vib: add new SPMI vibrator module

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 15/08/2023 04:20, Fenglin Wu wrote:
> 
> 
> On 8/14/2023 6:06 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 31/07/2023 07:37, Fenglin Wu wrote:
>>> Add compatible string 'qcom,spmi-vib-gen2' to support vibrator module
>>> inside PMI632, PMI7250B, PM7325B, PM7550BA.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Fenglin Wu <quic_fenglinw@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> ---
>>>   .../bindings/input/qcom,pm8xxx-vib.yaml          | 16 ++++++++++++----
>>>   1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/input/qcom,pm8xxx-vib.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/input/qcom,pm8xxx-vib.yaml
>>> index c8832cd0d7da..4a2319fc1e3f 100644
>>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/input/qcom,pm8xxx-vib.yaml
>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/input/qcom,pm8xxx-vib.yaml
>>> @@ -11,10 +11,18 @@ maintainers:
>>>   
>>>   properties:
>>>     compatible:
>>> -    enum:
>>> -      - qcom,pm8058-vib
>>> -      - qcom,pm8916-vib
>>> -      - qcom,pm8921-vib
>>> +    oneOf:
>>> +      - enum:
>>> +          - qcom,pm8058-vib
>>> +          - qcom,pm8916-vib
>>> +          - qcom,pm8921-vib
>>> +      - items:
>>> +          - enum:
>>> +              - qcom,pmi632-vib
>>> +              - qcom,pm7250b-vib
>>> +              - qcom,pm7325b-vib
>>> +              - qcom,pm7550b-vib
>>> +          - const: qcom,spmi-vib-gen2
>>
>> This does not seem to implement my comment:
>>
>> "Entirely remove qcom,spmi-vib-gen2 and
>> qcom,spmi-vib-gen1.
>>
>> Use device specific compatibles names only. As fallback and as first
>> compatible."
>>
>> It's nice to respond that you disagree with it. Therefore, I am not
>> going to Ack it.
> 
> I saw your comments and I replied your later comments in v2: 
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/b5e58172-beb5-0be3-834f-3f1db3e8b3b3@xxxxxxxxxxx/. 
> It might not be a good place to follow the discussion though, I am 
> pasting my last reply below:
> 
> 'Sorry, I forgot to mention, in v3, I added the 'reg' value to the
> register offset and no longer hard code the 16-bit register address,
> that makes the vibrators inside PMI632/PM7250B/PM7325B/PM7550BA all
> compatible, and that was another motivation of adding a generic
> compatible string and make the others as the fallback.
> 
> This will be still the case in v4, I might keep it similar in v3 but
> just drop "qcom,spmi-vib-gen1" '
> 
> Anyway, if this is still not a good reason to add a generic compatible 
> string, I can revert it back to use device specific compatible string 
> only in next patch.

I just don't see how this argument is anyhow related to what I said. I
did not comment on removing the fallback. I said use specific compatible
as fallback.

Best regards,
Krzysztof