From: Jason Cooper <jason@lakedaemon.net>
To: Simon Guinot <simon.guinot@sequanux.org>
Cc: Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com>,
Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, Vincent Donnefort <vdonnefort@gmail.com>,
stable@vger.kernel.org,
Gregory CLEMENT <gregory.clement@free-electrons.com>,
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: Thu, 25 Jun 2015 13:20:09 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150625132009.GC23515@io.lakedaemon.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150625091323.GH4853@kw.sim.vm.gnt>
On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 11:13:23AM +0200, Simon Guinot wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 02:32:53PM +0200, Simon Guinot wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 05:01:12PM +0000, Jason Cooper wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 05:15:28PM +0200, Gregory CLEMENT wrote:
> > > > On 17/06/2015 17:12, Gregory CLEMENT wrote:
> > > > > On 17/06/2015 15:19, Simon Guinot wrote:
> > > > >> The mvneta driver supports the Ethernet IP found in the Armada 370, XP,
> > > > >> 380 and 385 SoCs. Since at least one more hardware feature is available
> > > > >> for the Armada XP SoCs then a way to identify them is needed.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> This patch introduces a new compatible string "marvell,armada-xp-neta".
> > > > >
> > > > > Let's be future proof by going further. I would like to have an compatible string
> > > > > for each SoC even if we currently we don't use them.
> > >
> > > 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.
> >
> > So, should I add more compatible strings or not ?
>
> How do you want me to handle this ? Did you reach an agreement ?
Sorry, this slipped off my radar. Probably EBKAC. :)
I'm still of the opinion that future-proofing equates to guessing.
It has the advantage of, if we guess correctly, things are easier down
the road when we discover differences between similar IP blocks.
However, if we guess incorrectly, then we have a mess on our hands.
iow, this proposal fails poorly.
I've no problem breaking DT compatibility when it's determined that we
made a mistake (or mistakes) in the past. See the irqchip rework that
Marc did a few cycles ago.
The difference here is that we know better. We *know* that dtbs are
upgraded with the kernel. We *know* that no one is shipping products
with dtbs in ROMs. So what are we really trying to protect against?
thx,
Jason.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: jason@lakedaemon.net (Jason Cooper)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v2 1/3] net: mvneta: introduce compatible string "marvell, armada-xp-neta"
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2015 13:20:09 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150625132009.GC23515@io.lakedaemon.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150625091323.GH4853@kw.sim.vm.gnt>
On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 11:13:23AM +0200, Simon Guinot wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 02:32:53PM +0200, Simon Guinot wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 05:01:12PM +0000, Jason Cooper wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 05:15:28PM +0200, Gregory CLEMENT wrote:
> > > > On 17/06/2015 17:12, Gregory CLEMENT wrote:
> > > > > On 17/06/2015 15:19, Simon Guinot wrote:
> > > > >> The mvneta driver supports the Ethernet IP found in the Armada 370, XP,
> > > > >> 380 and 385 SoCs. Since at least one more hardware feature is available
> > > > >> for the Armada XP SoCs then a way to identify them is needed.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> This patch introduces a new compatible string "marvell,armada-xp-neta".
> > > > >
> > > > > Let's be future proof by going further. I would like to have an compatible string
> > > > > for each SoC even if we currently we don't use them.
> > >
> > > 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.
> >
> > So, should I add more compatible strings or not ?
>
> How do you want me to handle this ? Did you reach an agreement ?
Sorry, this slipped off my radar. Probably EBKAC. :)
I'm still of the opinion that future-proofing equates to guessing.
It has the advantage of, if we guess correctly, things are easier down
the road when we discover differences between similar IP blocks.
However, if we guess incorrectly, then we have a mess on our hands.
iow, this proposal fails poorly.
I've no problem breaking DT compatibility when it's determined that we
made a mistake (or mistakes) in the past. See the irqchip rework that
Marc did a few cycles ago.
The difference here is that we know better. We *know* that dtbs are
upgraded with the kernel. We *know* that no one is shipping products
with dtbs in ROMs. So what are we really trying to protect against?
thx,
Jason.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-06-25 13:20 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
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 [this message]
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=20150625132009.GC23515@io.lakedaemon.net \
--to=jason@lakedaemon.net \
--cc=andrew@lunn.ch \
--cc=gregory.clement@free-electrons.com \
--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=thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com \
--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.