Hi,
On Tue, Jun 1, 2021 at 10:50 AM Jianjun Wang [off-list ref] wrote:
MT8195 is an ARM platform SoC which has the same PCIe IP with MT8192.
Based on what I'm seeing internally, there seems to be some inconsistency
across the MediaTek platform on whether new compatible strings should be
introduced for "fully compatible" IP blocks.
If this hardware block in MT8195 is "the same" as the one in MT8192, do we
really need the new compatible string? Are there any concerns?
Thanks
ChenYu
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
Signed-off-by: Jianjun Wang <redacted>
---
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pci/mediatek-pcie-gen3.yaml | 4 +++-
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pci/mediatek-pcie-gen3.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pci/mediatek-pcie-gen3.yaml
index e7b1f9892da4..d5e4a3e63d97 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pci/mediatek-pcie-gen3.yaml
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pci/mediatek-pcie-gen3.yaml
@@ -48,7 +48,9 @@ allOf:
properties:
compatible:
- const: mediatek,mt8192-pcie
+ oneOf:
+ - const: mediatek,mt8192-pcie
+ - const: mediatek,mt8195-pcie
reg:
maxItems: 1
--2.18.0
_______________________________________________
Linux-mediatek mailing list
Linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mediatek
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel