On 08/22/2013 02:31 AM, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote: > The Palmas device contains only a USB VBUS-ID detector, so added a > compatible type *ti,palmas-usb-vid*. Didn't remove the existing compatible > types for backward compatibility.
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/extcon/extcon-palmas.txt > b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/extcon/extcon-palmas.txt > PALMAS USB COMPARATOR > Required Properties: > - - compatible : Should be "ti,palmas-usb" or "ti,twl6035-usb" > + - compatible : Should be "ti,palmas-usb-vid". "ti,twl6035-usb" and > + "ti,palmas-usb" is deprecated and is kept for backward compatibility. So this defines one new value and deprecates the two old values. Why isn't a new "ti,twl6035-usb-vid" entry useful? Don't you still need SoC-specific compatible values so the driver can enable any SoC-specific bug-fixes/workarounds later if needed? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
