Re: [PATCH v2 1/6] dt-bindings: vendor-prefixes: add Axera

[冷红林 <lenghonglin@axera-tech.com>]

On 9/3/2026 8:39 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 01, 2026 at 05:19:28PM +0800, Leng Honglin wrote:
>> Add the Axera Semiconductor vendor prefix for devicetree bindings.
>>
>> For more information, visit the official Axera Semiconductor website:
>> Chinese site: https://www.axera-tech.com/
>> English site: https://www.axera-tech.com/en
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Leng Honglin <lenghonglin@axera-tech.com>
>> ---
>>  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.yaml | 2 ++
>>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.yaml
>> index 396044f368e7..1dbafe682724 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.yaml
>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.yaml
>> @@ -219,6 +219,8 @@ patternProperties:
>>      description: Shanghai Awinic Technology Co., Ltd.
>>    "^axentia,.*":
>>      description: Axentia Technologies AB
>> +  "^axera,.*":
> 
> So how did you implement own comment?
> 
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof

Hi Krzysztof,

I sincerely apologize for the confusion. In my previous reply, I did
promise to change the prefix to "axera-tech" to align with our domain
name. I should have explained my change of mind in the v2 patch notes.

When I started making the changes internally for v2, I realized that
our existing BSPs, bootloaders, and a large amount of downstream
codebase already heavily rely on the "axera,*" prefix for compatible
strings. Changing it to "axera-tech" now would cause massive breakage
and compatibility issues across our existing ecosystem.

Because of this historical legacy, I looked for similar cases in the
upstream bindings and noticed that there are accepted precedents where
the prefix reflects the core brand rather than the full domain (for
example, "^cix,.*" for cixtech.com).

Would it be acceptable to keep "axera" as the prefix to preserve
compatibility with our existing deployed systems, even though our
domain is axera-tech.com?

If this is strictly not allowed, we will have to figure out a
migration path internally, but preserving "axera" would be highly
preferable for our ecosystem. I am very sorry again for not clarifying
this earlier.

Best regards,
Leng