Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1500958 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Steve Twiss <stwiss.opensource@diasemi.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-10-14 15:10 +0200 |
| Last post | 2016-10-14 15:10 +0200 |
| Articles | 1 — 1 participant |
Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
RE: [PATCH V1 05/10] thermal: da9062/61: Thermal junction temperature monitoring driver Steve Twiss <stwiss.opensource@diasemi.com> - 2016-10-14 15:10 +0200
| From | Steve Twiss <stwiss.opensource@diasemi.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-14 15:10 +0200 |
| Subject | RE: [PATCH V1 05/10] thermal: da9062/61: Thermal junction temperature monitoring driver |
| Message-ID | <ssapk-1FC-21@gated-at.bofh.it> |
An update.
On: 07 October 2016 18:49, Steve Twiss wrote:
> On 07 October 2016 06:29, Keerthy [mailto:a0393675@ti.com] wrote:
> > On Thursday 06 October 2016 02:13 PM, Steve Twiss wrote:
> > > From: Steve Twiss <stwiss.opensource@diasemi.com>
[...]
> > > +static const struct da9062_thermal_config da9062_config = {
> > > + .name = "da9062-thermal",
> > > +};
> > > +
> > > +static const struct da9062_thermal_config da9061_config = {
> > > + .name = "da9061-thermal",
> > > +};
> > > +
> > > +static const struct of_device_id da9062_compatible_reg_id_table[] = {
> > > + { .compatible = "dlg,da9062-thermal", .data = &da9062_config },
> > > + { .compatible = "dlg,da9061-thermal", .data = &da9061_config },
> >
> > Two separate compatible values. Do you have anything different apart
> > from the name? Why use 2 compatibles when there is absolutely no
> > difference?
>
> Yes.
> This was a comment for the watchdog device driver as well. My concern was having
> multiple devices (61 and 62) in the same system -- and allowing the driver to report
> the hardware difference.
>
> There is discussion going on about this in other threads. Not certain of the
> final outcome yet, apart from my existing proposal should be changed.
An answer to this came from comments by Dmitry Torokhov and Guenter Roeck, who
suggested this: https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/10/7/641
I will take a look at this for V2.
Regards,
Steve
Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel
csiph-web