[PATCH v3 1/6] dt-bindings: display: add dt-bindings for STM32 LVDS device

[Raphael Gallais-Pou]

On 1/16/24 08:42, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 15/01/2024 17:51, Raphael Gallais-Pou wrote:
>> On 1/15/24 16:46, Rob Herring wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jan 15, 2024 at 02:20:04PM +0100, Raphael Gallais-Pou wrote:
>>>> Add "st,stm32mp25-lvds" compatible.
>>>>
> A nit, subject: drop second/last, redundant "dt-bindings for". The
> "dt-bindings" prefix is already stating that these are bindings.
> See also:
> https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.7-rc8/source/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/submitting-patches.rst#L18
>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Raphael Gallais-Pou <raphael.gallais-pou at foss.st.com>
>>>> ---
>>>> Depends on: "dt-bindings: stm32: add clocks and reset binding for
>>>> 	    stm32mp25 platform" by Gabriel Fernandez
>>>>
>>>> Changes in v3:
>>>> 	- Clarify commit dependency
>>>> 	- Fix includes in the example
>>>> 	- Fix YAML
>>>> 	- Add "clock-cells" description
>>>> 	- s/regroups/is composed of/
>>>> 	- Changed compatible to show SoC specificity
>>>>
>>>> Changes in v2:
>>>> 	- Switch compatible and clock-cells related areas
>>>> 	- Remove faulty #include in the example.
>>>> 	- Add entry in MAINTAINERS
>>>> ---
>>>>  .../bindings/display/st,stm32-lvds.yaml       | 119 ++++++++++++++++++
>>> Filename matching compatible.
>> Hi Rob,
>>
>>
>> I was unsure about this.
>>
>> The driver will eventually support several SoCs with different compatibles,
>> wouldn't this be more confusing ?
> No. "Eventually" might never happen.
>
>> I also wanted to keep the similarity with the "st,stm32-<ip>.yaml" name for the
>> DRM STM drivers. Would that be possible ?
> But why? The consistency we want is the filename matching compatible,
> not matching other filenames. If you have here multiple devices,
> document them *now*.


Hi Krzysztof,

|There is no multiple devices, so I will stick to the "st,stm32mp25-lvds"
pattern for now.|

>
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Raphaël
> I hope you did not ignore rest of the comments... We expect some sort of
> "ack/ok/I'll fix/whatever" message and you wrote nothing further.

Although I did not acknowledged what has been said previously, I always take
into account every comment on my patches.  I understand that it can lead to some confusion.  So rest assured that I did not
ignore Rob's and Dmitry's review.


Regards,

Raphaël

>
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof
>