From: Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com>
To: Jason Cooper <jason@lakedaemon.net>
Cc: Gregory CLEMENT <gregory.clement@free-electrons.com>,
Simon Guinot <simon.guinot@sequanux.org>,
Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, Vincent Donnefort <vdonnefort@gmail.com>,
stable@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
Sebastian Hesselbarth <sebastian.hesselbarth@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] net: mvneta: introduce compatible string "marvell, armada-xp-neta"
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2015 22:43:12 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150617224312.3bfc80d9@free-electrons.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150617170112.GD2917@io.lakedaemon.net>
Jason,
On Wed, 17 Jun 2015 17:01:12 +0000, Jason Cooper wrote:
> I disagree with this. We can't predict what incosistencies we'll discover in
> the future. We should only assign new compatible strings based on known IP
> variations when we discover them. This seems fraught with demons since we
> can't predict the scope of affected IP blocks (some steppings of one SoC, three
> SoCs plus two steppings of a fourth, etc)
>
> imho, the 'future-proofing' lies in being specific as to the naming of the
> compatible strings against known hardware variations at the time.
Except that this clearly doesn't work, and the case raised by Simon is
a perfect illustration of why planning ahead is beneficial. We already
had the issue several times on mvebu platforms, so it should really
become the rule to have one compatible string specific to the actual
SoC in the list of compatible strings.
Not doing so requires breaking DT backward compatibility more often, so
wanting DT backward compatibility and not wanting to plan ahead is a
bit antagonist. But I personally don't care much about DT backward
compatibility, and I've explained numerous times why, so in the end I
don't really care much.
Best regards,
Thomas
--
Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering
http://free-electrons.com
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com (Thomas Petazzoni)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v2 1/3] net: mvneta: introduce compatible string "marvell, armada-xp-neta"
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2015 22:43:12 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150617224312.3bfc80d9@free-electrons.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150617170112.GD2917@io.lakedaemon.net>
Jason,
On Wed, 17 Jun 2015 17:01:12 +0000, Jason Cooper wrote:
> I disagree with this. We can't predict what incosistencies we'll discover in
> the future. We should only assign new compatible strings based on known IP
> variations when we discover them. This seems fraught with demons since we
> can't predict the scope of affected IP blocks (some steppings of one SoC, three
> SoCs plus two steppings of a fourth, etc)
>
> imho, the 'future-proofing' lies in being specific as to the naming of the
> compatible strings against known hardware variations at the time.
Except that this clearly doesn't work, and the case raised by Simon is
a perfect illustration of why planning ahead is beneficial. We already
had the issue several times on mvebu platforms, so it should really
become the rule to have one compatible string specific to the actual
SoC in the list of compatible strings.
Not doing so requires breaking DT backward compatibility more often, so
wanting DT backward compatibility and not wanting to plan ahead is a
bit antagonist. But I personally don't care much about DT backward
compatibility, and I've explained numerous times why, so in the end I
don't really care much.
Best regards,
Thomas
--
Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering
http://free-electrons.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-06-17 20:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 39+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-06-17 13:19 [PATCH v2 0/3] Fix Ethernet jumbo frames support for Armada 370 and 38x Simon Guinot
2015-06-17 13:19 ` Simon Guinot
2015-06-17 13:19 ` [PATCH v2 1/3] net: mvneta: introduce compatible string "marvell,armada-xp-neta" Simon Guinot
2015-06-17 13:19 ` [PATCH v2 1/3] net: mvneta: introduce compatible string "marvell, armada-xp-neta" Simon Guinot
2015-06-17 15:12 ` [PATCH v2 1/3] net: mvneta: introduce compatible string "marvell,armada-xp-neta" Gregory CLEMENT
2015-06-17 15:12 ` [PATCH v2 1/3] net: mvneta: introduce compatible string "marvell, armada-xp-neta" Gregory CLEMENT
2015-06-17 15:15 ` Gregory CLEMENT
2015-06-17 15:15 ` Gregory CLEMENT
2015-06-17 17:01 ` Jason Cooper
2015-06-17 17:01 ` Jason Cooper
2015-06-17 20:43 ` Thomas Petazzoni [this message]
2015-06-17 20:43 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2015-06-17 21:39 ` Jason Cooper
2015-06-17 21:39 ` Jason Cooper
2015-06-17 21:39 ` Jason Cooper
2015-06-18 7:31 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2015-06-18 7:31 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2015-06-19 12:32 ` Simon Guinot
2015-06-19 12:32 ` Simon Guinot
2015-06-25 9:13 ` Simon Guinot
2015-06-25 9:13 ` Simon Guinot
2015-06-25 13:20 ` Jason Cooper
2015-06-25 13:20 ` Jason Cooper
2015-06-29 13:03 ` Gregory CLEMENT
2015-06-29 13:03 ` Gregory CLEMENT
2015-06-29 13:03 ` [PATCH v2 1/3] net: mvneta: introduce compatible string "marvell,armada-xp-neta" Gregory CLEMENT
2015-06-29 13:03 ` [PATCH v2 1/3] net: mvneta: introduce compatible string "marvell, armada-xp-neta" Gregory CLEMENT
2015-06-17 13:19 ` [PATCH v2 2/3] ARM: mvebu: update Ethernet compatible string for Armada XP Simon Guinot
2015-06-17 13:19 ` Simon Guinot
2015-06-29 13:04 ` Gregory CLEMENT
2015-06-29 13:04 ` Gregory CLEMENT
2015-06-17 13:19 ` [PATCH v2 3/3] ARM: mvebu: disable IP checksum with jumbo frames for Armada 370 Simon Guinot
2015-06-17 13:19 ` Simon Guinot
2015-06-17 15:24 ` [PATCH v2 0/3] Fix Ethernet jumbo frames support for Armada 370 and 38x Thomas Petazzoni
2015-06-17 15:24 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2015-06-17 17:22 ` Simon Guinot
2015-06-17 17:22 ` Simon Guinot
2015-06-17 20:43 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2015-06-17 20:43 ` Thomas Petazzoni
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20150617224312.3bfc80d9@free-electrons.com \
--to=thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com \
--cc=andrew@lunn.ch \
--cc=gregory.clement@free-electrons.com \
--cc=jason@lakedaemon.net \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sebastian.hesselbarth@gmail.com \
--cc=simon.guinot@sequanux.org \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=vdonnefort@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.