diff mbox series

[v2,4/5] memory: brcmstb_dpfe: introduce version-specific compatible strings

Message ID 20240119215231.758844-5-mmayer@broadcom.com (mailing list archive)
State New, archived
Headers show
Series memory: brcmstb_dpfe: support DPFE API v4 | expand

Commit Message

Markus Mayer Jan. 19, 2024, 9:52 p.m. UTC
Introduce compatible strings brcm,dpfe-cpu-v1 through brcm,dpfe-cpu-v3
to the Broadcom DPFE driver.

Signed-off-by: Markus Mayer <mmayer@broadcom.com>
---
 drivers/memory/brcmstb_dpfe.c | 15 ++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

Comments

Krzysztof Kozlowski Jan. 23, 2024, 9:27 p.m. UTC | #1
On 19/01/2024 22:52, Markus Mayer wrote:
> Introduce compatible strings brcm,dpfe-cpu-v1 through brcm,dpfe-cpu-v3
> to the Broadcom DPFE driver.

Nothing improved here. I think my last comment was pretty clear what I
expect.

Best regards,
Krzysztof
Markus Mayer Feb. 1, 2024, 10:40 p.m. UTC | #2
On Tue, 23 Jan 2024 at 13:28, Krzysztof Kozlowski
<krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote:
>
> On 19/01/2024 22:52, Markus Mayer wrote:
> > Introduce compatible strings brcm,dpfe-cpu-v1 through brcm,dpfe-cpu-v3
> > to the Broadcom DPFE driver.
>
> Nothing improved here. I think my last comment was pretty clear what I
> expect.

You are correct. Nothing changed here. I did not get the impression
that you were asking for changes to the actual driver code.

As I said in my response to the previous patch, I am trying my best to
work with maintainers and other community members providing feedback.

Please explain in further detail what you are looking for. Maybe this
will already happen in conjunction with patch 3/5. Your responses
there may already answer my question here. I guess we'll find out.

Regards,
-Markus

> Best regards,
> Krzysztof
Krzysztof Kozlowski Feb. 2, 2024, 7:24 a.m. UTC | #3
On 01/02/2024 23:40, Markus Mayer wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Jan 2024 at 13:28, Krzysztof Kozlowski
> <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote:
>>
>> On 19/01/2024 22:52, Markus Mayer wrote:
>>> Introduce compatible strings brcm,dpfe-cpu-v1 through brcm,dpfe-cpu-v3
>>> to the Broadcom DPFE driver.
>>
>> Nothing improved here. I think my last comment was pretty clear what I
>> expect.
> 
> You are correct. Nothing changed here. I did not get the impression
> that you were asking for changes to the actual driver code.

I think my concern was pretty obvious:
"No, why?"

Your commit msg is pointless. Says nothing. It says what you do, but it
is obvious and redundant. I see what you do from the patch diff.

What your commit msg is supposed to say, is explain why this is needed
and what problem are you solving.

This applies to all your commits, to all projects, downstream or
upstream. Repeating what the diff is doing is trivial and does not help
people to understand why this commit is there and what is the commit's
bigger impact.

So after I asked to provide rationale, you send exactly the same commit
without rationale.

And this is repeating in this entire patchset. Patch #1 only mentions
"no actual benefit", but it is discussible. It provides benefit in my
opinion and nothing in your commit msg gives arguments to support your
clause. Patch #2 does not need more explanations but it also does not
make sense in entire series - you want to drop the specific compatibles!
What's more patch #2 does not make any sense with combination of patch
#3 and it is not explained in the commit msg.

Patch #3 also brings zero explanations why you are doing it. From all
four patches, only one had some sort of explanation - patch #1.

Best regards,
Krzysztof
diff mbox series

Patch

diff --git a/drivers/memory/brcmstb_dpfe.c b/drivers/memory/brcmstb_dpfe.c
index a7ab3d377206..a44a70d028f6 100644
--- a/drivers/memory/brcmstb_dpfe.c
+++ b/drivers/memory/brcmstb_dpfe.c
@@ -924,7 +924,20 @@  static const struct of_device_id brcmstb_dpfe_of_match[] = {
 	{ .compatible = "brcm,bcm7271-dpfe-cpu", .data = &dpfe_api_old_v2 },
 	{ .compatible = "brcm,bcm7278-dpfe-cpu", .data = &dpfe_api_old_v2 },
 	{ .compatible = "brcm,bcm7211-dpfe-cpu", .data = &dpfe_api_new_v2 },
-	/* API v3 is the default going forward */
+
+	/*
+	 * Match the DPFE API flavour based on a versioned compatible string
+	 * that tells us which API version the hardware speaks.
+	 */
+	{ .compatible = "brcm,dpfe-cpu-v1", .data = &dpfe_api_old_v2 },
+	{ .compatible = "brcm,dpfe-cpu-v2", .data = &dpfe_api_new_v2 },
+	{ .compatible = "brcm,dpfe-cpu-v3", .data = &dpfe_api_v3 },
+
+	/*
+	 * This "default" compatible string should no longer be used. It has
+	 * been removed from the binding but kept here for backward
+	 * compatibility.
+	 */
 	{ .compatible = "brcm,dpfe-cpu", .data = &dpfe_api_v3 },
 	{}
 };