Hi Ezequiel,

Am 26.06.21 um 02:47 schrieb Ezequiel Garcia:

Hey Dafna,

Thanks a lot for reviewing this.

On Fri, 2021-06-25 at 12:21 +0300, Dafna Hirschfeld wrote:

quoted

Hi,

On 24.06.21 21:26, Ezequiel Garcia wrote:

quoted

From: Paul Kocialkowski<redacted>

The Rockchip PX30 SoC has a Hantro VPU that features a decoder (VDPU2)
and an encoder (VEPU2).

Signed-off-by: Paul Kocialkowski<redacted>
Signed-off-by: Ezequiel Garcia<redacted>
---
   Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/rockchip-vpu.yaml | 3 +++
   1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)

diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/rockchip-vpu.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/rockchip-vpu.yaml
index b88172a59de7..3b9c5aa91fcc 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/rockchip-vpu.yaml
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/rockchip-vpu.yaml

@@ -28,6 +28,9 @@ properties:
         - items:
             - const: rockchip,rk3228-vpu
             - const: rockchip,rk3399-vpu
+      - items:
+          - const: rockchip,px30-vpu
+          - const: rockchip,rk3399-vpu

This rk3399 compatible is already mentioned in the last 'items' list, should we add it again?

What we are mandating here is that "rockchip,px30-vpu" can only be used
with "rockchip,rk3399-vpu".

I.e.:

   compatible = "rockchip,px30-vpu", "rockchip,rk3399-vpu";

So why not making the already existing to:

       - items:
           - enum:
               - rockchip,px30-vpu
               - rockchip,rk3228-vpu
           - const: rockchip,rk3399-vpu

Alex