Re: [PATCH v1 1/2] dt-bindings: arm: qcom: Add Maili SoC compatible
Konrad Dybcio <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | org.kernel.vger.linux-arm-msm,org.kernel.vger.linux-devicetree,org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On 8/19/26 11:04 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 19/08/2026 10:56, Konrad Dybcio wrote: >> On 8/19/26 9:02 AM, Yijie Yang wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 8/19/2026 2:35 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>>> On 19/08/2026 08:28, Yijie Yang wrote: >> >> [...] >> >>>>>>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom.yaml >>>>>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom.yaml >>>>>>> @@ -175,6 +175,9 @@ properties: >>>>>>> - qcom,kaanapali-qrd >>>>>>> - const: qcom,kaanapali >>>>>>> + - items: >>>>>>> + - const: qcom,maili >>>>>> >>>>>> Heh? This cannot go alone. >>>>> >>>>> Keep only the SoC compatible string and exclude the board for now, as >>>>> the latter is not currently used. >>>>> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260622-brainy-rapid-tody-dd7c3a@quoll/ >>>> >>>> No, read my message there - this should be rejected! I even wrote: >>>> >>>> "But if ever this commit is used in argument "oh, compatible without >>>> user was accepted here by Krzysztof, so I can do the same", I will >>>> simply NAK such future contribution without reading the rest." >>>> >>>> So NAK because you did not even bother to read what I already stated! >>> >>> In patch 2/2, pd-mapper serves as the user. Is there any other reason to reject this binding? >> >> This defines/allows a top-level compatible of >> >> compatible = "qcom,maili"; >> >> which is missing the board part, and that is strictly required. > > Not sure if you are agreeing with me or disagreeing... Agreeing - I'm saying that we need the board compatible to be present in the tuple, which the submission doesn't contain Konrad