On 16/12/2025 19:21:27+0000, Conor Dooley wrote:

On Tue, Dec 16, 2025 at 06:26:44PM +0100, Alexandre Belloni wrote:

quoted

On 16/12/2025 17:56:20+0100, Robert Marko wrote:

quoted

On Tue, Dec 16, 2025 at 5:29 PM Alexandre Belloni
[off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On 15/12/2025 17:35:21+0100, Robert Marko wrote:

quoted

Create a new binding file named microchip.yaml, to which all Microchip
based devices will be moved to.

Start by moving AT91, next will be SparX-5.

Both lines of SoCs are designed by different business units and are
wildly different and while both business units are currently owned by
the same company, there are no guarantees this will stay this way so I
would simply avoid merging both.

Hi Alexandre,

The merge was requested by Conor instead of adding a new binding for LAN969x [1]

[1] https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-arm-kernel/patch/20251203122313.1287950-2-robert.marko@sartura.hr/

I would still keep them separate, SparX-5 is closer to what is
devicetree/bindings/mips/mscc.txt than to any atmel descended SoCs.

If you don't want the sparx-5 stuff in with the atmel bits, that's fine,
but I stand over my comments about this lan969x stuff not getting a file
of its own.
Probably that means putting it in the atmel file, alongside the lan966x
boards that are in there at the moment.

I'm fine with this.

-- 
Alexandre Belloni, co-owner and COO, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com