On 15-10-22, 10:04, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > Several devices like SM6350, SM8150 and SC7280 are actually compatible, > so use one compatible fallback for all of them. > > Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx> > --- > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dma/qcom,gpi.yaml | 10 ++++++---- > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dma/qcom,gpi.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dma/qcom,gpi.yaml > index 750b40c32213..0c2894498845 100644 > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dma/qcom,gpi.yaml > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dma/qcom,gpi.yaml > @@ -20,12 +20,14 @@ properties: > compatible: > oneOf: > - enum: > - - qcom,sc7280-gpi-dma > - qcom,sdm845-gpi-dma > - qcom,sm6350-gpi-dma > - - qcom,sm8350-gpi-dma > - - qcom,sm8450-gpi-dma > - > + - items: > + - enum: > + - qcom,sc7280-gpi-dma > + - qcom,sm8350-gpi-dma > + - qcom,sm8450-gpi-dma > + - const: qcom,sm6350-gpi-dma I think it makes sense but can we document this in binding as well that why people should use these two compatibles. I am fine with this being comments here.. > - items: > - enum: > - qcom,sdm670-gpi-dma > -- > 2.34.1 -- ~Vinod
