Re: [PATCH 01/10] dt: bindings: clock: add mtmips SoCs clock device tree binding documentation

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 20/03/2023 19:23, Arınç ÜNAL wrote:
> On 20.03.2023 21:11, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 20/03/2023 19:07, Arınç ÜNAL wrote:
>>> On 20.03.2023 21:01, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>>> On 20/03/2023 17:18, Sergio Paracuellos wrote:
>>>>> +properties:
>>>>> +  compatible:
>>>>> +    items:
>>>>> +      - enum:
>>>>> +          - ralink,rt2880-sysc
>>>>> +          - ralink,rt3050-sysc
>>>>> +          - ralink,rt3052-sysc
>>>>> +          - ralink,rt3352-sysc
>>>>> +          - ralink,rt3883-sysc
>>>>> +          - ralink,rt5350-sysc
>>>>> +          - ralink,mt7620-sysc
>>>>> +          - ralink,mt7620a-sysc
>>>>> +          - ralink,mt7628-sysc
>>>>> +          - ralink,mt7688-sysc
>>>>
>>>> One more comment - this and maybe other compatibles - have wrong vendor
>>>> prefix. This is mediatek, not ralink.
>>>
>>> This platform was acquired from Ralink by MediaTek. I couldn't change
>>> some existing ralink compatible strings to mediatek as Rob explained on
>>> my pinctrl patch series that we don't do that. The compatible strings on
>>> this patch series here are new but I'd rather keep the compatible
>>> strings ralink to keep things consistent.
>>
>> The comment that you cannot change existing compatibles does not apply
>> to these, because these are new. However indeed some SoCs have already
>> compatibles with ralink, so it's fine for these. mt7620 and mt7628 are
>> already used with mediatek, so these should be rather corrected to new
>> prefix.
> 
> If you're talking about the pinctrl schemas for MT7620 and MT7628, it's 
> just the name of the yaml files that have mediatek. The compatible 
> string is still ralink so it should be kept ralink here as well.

No, I am talking about compatibles.

Best regards,
Krzysztof