Hi Eugeniu, again
> Yeah, it is true "so far". I think there is no problem on current kernel. > But, unfortunately we need to keep compatibility for old/new DT > (= actually, I don't like this DT rule. It is 100% "shackles for the legs") > Thus, my big concern is that, in the future, > "if" we added "renesas,ulcb" compatible driver/soc, > both h3/m3 ulcb will use it. > Then, if "h3" can work/boot by using same "m3" settings, it is no problem for > me > (= "works but limited" is also OK, of course. > This means "matched to more generic compatible") "renesas,ulcb" is very generic naming. Not only h3/m3, if we had v3/e3/d3 etc ulcb, and if we had such compatible driver/soc, it needs to match to all ulcb. In reality, maybe we don't create such compatible driver, though. But, I don't know, I can follow to maintainer opinion. Best regards --- Kuninori Morimoto
