Re: [PATCH 1/9] dt-bindings: mfd: Add bindings for SAM9X7 LCD controller

[Manikandan.M]

On 14/06/23 20:10, Nicolas Ferre wrote:
> On 13/06/2023 at 20:21, Conor Dooley wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 13, 2023 at 08:17:13PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>> On 13/06/2023 09:04, Manikandan Muralidharan wrote:
>>>> Add new compatible string for the XLCD controller on SAM9X7 SoC.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Manikandan Muralidharan<manikandan.m@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>> ---
>>>>   Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/atmel-hlcdc.txt | 1 +
>>>>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/atmel-hlcdc.txt 
>>>> b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/atmel-hlcdc.txt
>>>> index 5f8880cc757e..7c77b6bf4adb 100644
>>>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/atmel-hlcdc.txt
>>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/atmel-hlcdc.txt
>>>> @@ -8,6 +8,7 @@ Required properties:
>>>>      "atmel,sama5d3-hlcdc"
>>>>      "atmel,sama5d4-hlcdc"
>>>>      "microchip,sam9x60-hlcdc"
>>>> +   "microchip,sam9x7-xlcdc"
>>> Google says sam9x7 is a series, not a SoC. Please add compatibles for
>>> specific SoCs, not for series.
>> We had this one a few weeks ago, see
>> https://lore.kernel.org/all/add5e49e-8416-ba9f-819a-da944938c05f@xxxxxxxxxxxxx/
>> and its parents. Outcome of that seemed to be that using "sam9x7" was 
>> fine.
> 
> And it's where it begins to be funny, as the LCD is precisely one aspect 
> where we differentiate between sam9x75, sam9x72 and sam9x70...
> So please Manikandan sort this out if difference between these chips 
> will be better handled with different compatibility string, in 
> particular about //, LVDS and MIPI-DSI variants!
Yes Sure, I will replace the compatible as s/sam9x7/sam9x75/g to handle 
the different variants of sam9x7 better.
> 
> Regards,
>    Nicolas
> 

-- 
Thanks and Regards,
Manikandan M.