On 17/08/2022 11:15, Samuel Holland wrote:

quoted

quoted

+    audio-codec@2030000 {
+        compatible = "simple-mfd", "syscon";

This cannot be on its own. Both require device specific compatible.

Again, the device-specific compatible does not exist, because the binding for
the audio codec has not been written (and it will be quite nontrivial).

So I can:
  1) Leave the example as-is until the audio codec binding gets written,
     and fill in the specific compatible at that time.
  2) Remove the example, with the reasoning that the example really
     belongs with the MFD parent (like for the other regulator). Then
     there will be no example until the audio codec binding is written.
  3) Drop the analog LDOs from this series entirely, and some parts
     of the SoC (like thermal monitoring) cannot be added to the DTSI
     until the audio codec binding is written.

What do you think?

The same question applies for the D1 SoC DTSI, where I use this same construct.

(And technically this does validate with the current schema.)

BTW, it validates only because of limitation in DT schema. Such
combination is not allowed and I wonder if we can make the schema
stricter...

Best regards,
Krzysztof

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