On Thu, Jan 2, 2020 at 4:33 PM Maxime Ripard [off-list ref] wrote:

On Tue, Dec 31, 2019 at 06:35:25PM +0530, Jagan Teki wrote:

quoted

The MIPI DSI PHY controller on Allwinner R40 is similar
on the one on A31.

Add R40 compatible and append A31 compatible as fallback.

Signed-off-by: Jagan Teki <jagan@amarulasolutions.com>
---
Changes for v3:
- update the binding in new yaml format

 .../devicetree/bindings/phy/allwinner,sun6i-a31-mipi-dphy.yaml   | 1 +
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)

diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/allwinner,sun6i-a31-mipi-dphy.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/allwinner,sun6i-a31-mipi-dphy.yaml
index 8841938050b2..0c283fe79402 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/allwinner,sun6i-a31-mipi-dphy.yaml
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/allwinner,sun6i-a31-mipi-dphy.yaml

@@ -18,6 +18,7 @@ properties:
     oneOf:
       - const: allwinner,sun6i-a31-mipi-dphy
       - items:
+          - const: allwinner,sun8i-r40-mipi-dphy
           - const: allwinner,sun50i-a64-mipi-dphy
           - const: allwinner,sun6i-a31-mipi-dphy

This isn't doing what you say it does.

Here you're stating that there's two valid values, one that is a
single element allwinner,sun6i-a31-mipi-dphy, and another which is a
list of three elements allwinner,sun8i-r40-mipi-dphy,
allwinner,sun50i-a64-mipi-dphy and allwinner,sun6i-a31-mipi-dphy, in
that order.

I got it Maxime, thanks for pointing this.

Did you run make dtbs_check and dt_bindings_check?

I sure I didn't, thanks for the clue.

Will do this on another patch as well.

Jagan.

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel