On Wed, Aug 19, 2020 at 03:04:48PM +0100, Cristian Marussi wrote: > Property 'regulator-compatible' is now deprecated (even if still widely > used in the code base), and the node-name fallback works fine only as long
I'm seeing a very small number of DTs using it, the majority of which are pretty old - the arm64 ones are just mistakes on the part of reviewers. > as the nodes are named in an unique way; if it makes sense to use a common > name and identifying them using an index through a 'reg' property the > standard advices to use a naming in the form <common-name>@<unit>. > In this case the above matching mechanism based on the simple (common) name > will fail and the only viable alternative would be to properly define the > deprecrated 'regulator-compatible' property equal to the full name > <common-name>@<unit>. This seems like a massive jump. You appear to be saying that the reg property is unusable which doesn't seem right to me? > In order to address this case without using such deprecated property, > define a new boolean flag .of_match_full_name in struct regulator_desc to > force the core to match against the node full-name instead. I can't tell from this description what this change is intended to do, and I suspect it'd be difficult for anyone trying to figure out if they should use this or not. What is a full name and what should people put in there? What would one look like for example? I have to look at the code to see that this is changing to compare against the full_name field in the node and there's no kerneldoc for struct device_node. I'm also wondering why we can't just add this to the list of fallbacks rather than requiring some custom per driver thing? > - name = child->name; > + name = !desc->of_match_full_name ? > + child->name : child->full_name; Please write normal conditional statements for the benefits of people who have to read this code, the extra ! in there isn't adding anything here either.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
