Re: [PATCH V3 2/4] dt-bindings: mmc: sdhci-msm: Document the Glymur compatible

[Monish Chunara]

On 7/28/2026 5:52 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 21/07/2026 16:30, Monish Chunara wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 7/8/2026 12:18 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jul 06, 2026 at 07:43:44PM +0530, Monish Chunara wrote:
>>>> From: Monish Chunara <monish.chunara@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>
>>>> Glymur integrates the MSM SDHCI v5 controller. Document the SoC-specific
>>>> 'qcom,glymur-sdhci' compatible as required by binding convention to
>>>> identify the hardware and reserve the namespace for future SoC-specific
>>>> quirks, with 'qcom,sdhci-msm-v5' as the fallback.
>>>
>>> Drop half of above sentence.
>>>
>>> "Document the SDHCI controller on Qualcomm Glymur soC, fully compatible
>>> with existing MSM SDHCI v5."
>>>
>>> You do not need to say anything about some conventions or reserving
>>> namespaces. We do not reserve namespaces...
>>>
>>> Acked-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>> Krzysztof
>>>
>>
>> Sure, thanks. will update in v4. 
>>
>> Just for my understanding, though: how does the suggested wording capture the 
>> why behind the change? Per previous comments and understanding, the rationale 
>> for introducing the SoC-specific compatible is the reason we are making this 
>> change. For future submissions, this would help to avoid similar back-and-forth.
>>
> 
> Why do you think you need to document the "why" if it is 100% obvious
> (and I did state it many times)?
> 
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof

This was asked because it was suggested on first-post to add a why. 

"Same questions as always... why? Don't explain what you did. Explain why
ou did that way."

https://lore.kernel.org/all/9bb28a60-2c01-449d-9456-bcf2d780b68c@xxxxxxxxxx/

Pardon, if this was a misunderstanding.

Regards,
Monish