Hi Andrew,
Am 16.11.2017 um 16:53 schrieb Andrew F. Davis afd@ti.com:
On 11/16/2017 07:43 AM, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
Am 16.11.2017 um 13:32 schrieb Tomi Valkeinen tomi.valkeinen@ti.com:
On 16/11/17 10:50, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
The vendor name was "toppoly" but other panels and the vendor list have defined it as "tpo". So let's fix it in driver and bindings.
Signed-off-by: H. Nikolaus Schaller hns@goldelico.com
-MODULE_ALIAS("spi:toppoly,td028ttec1"); +MODULE_ALIAS("spi:tpo,td028ttec1");
Doesn't this mean that the module won't load if you have old bindings?
Hm.
Well, I think it can load but doesn't automatically from DT strings which might be unexpected.
Can't we have two module aliases?
I think we can. Just a random example: https://elixir.free-electrons.com/linux/latest/source/drivers/w1/slaves/w1_t...
So we should keep both.
Even better would be to drop both MODULE_ALIAS and let the MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE macro define them for your from the SPI id table.
Why would that be better?
As far as I see it will need more code and changes than adding one line of MODULE_ALIAS.
Although it doesn't look like this driver has an SPI id table, you should probably add one, I be interested to see if this module is always being matched through the "spi" or the "of" alias..
Could you please propose how that code should look like, so that I can test?
BR and thanks, Nikolaus Schaller
Should I submit a new version?
BR, Nikolaus
-- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html