Re: [PATCH V2 1/4] dt-bindings: thermal: qcom-tsens: Add ipq5018 compatible

[Sricharan Ramabadhran]

On 9/19/2023 6:26 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 19/09/2023 14:48, Sricharan Ramabadhran wrote:
> > On 9/19/2023 6:02 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > > On 19/09/2023 09:22, Sricharan Ramabadhran wrote:
> > > > On 9/15/2023 6:15 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > > > > On 15/09/2023 14:43, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > > > > > On 15/09/2023 14:15, Sricharan Ramabadhran wrote:
> > > > > > > IPQ5018 has tsens v1.0 block with 4 sensors and 1 interrupt.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Sricharan Ramabadhran <quic_srichara@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > > > ---
> > > > > > >     [v2] Sorted the compatible and removed example
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > >
> > > > > No, unreviewed. Your driver says it is not compatible with
> > > > > qcom,tsens-v1. This does not look right :/
> > > >
> > > >     Yes it is V1 IP, but since there is no RPM, to enable the IP/SENSORS
> > > >     have to do those steps after calling init_common. Similar reason
> > > >     added a new feat as well in patch #2 as well. Hence for this,
> > > >     new compatible was required.
> > >
> > > I dud not write about new or old compatible ("compatible" as noun). I
> > > wrote that it is not compatible ("compatible" as adjective) with v1.
> >
> >    Ho, in that case, yes it is not compatible with V1 init and features
> >    because of 'no rpm'. So in that case, should this be documented
> >    as a separate version of 'V1 without rpm' ?
>
> It should not be mixed with regular v1, just as new entry there. I don't
> think fallback is needed - just use SoC specific compatible.
 ok, sure, will add in V3.

Regards,
 Sricharan