On 17/10/2022 04:09, Matt Ranostay wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 13, 2022 at 09:05:11AM -0400, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 12/10/2022 14:00, Matt Ranostay wrote:
>>> Add missing ti,j721e-system-controller to bus defines in mcu/wakeup
>>> domains to avoid the following similar warnings from dt-schema checks:
>>>
>>> arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j721s2-common-proc-board.dtb: syscon@40f00000: compatible: ['syscon', 'simple-mfd'] is too short'
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Matt Ranostay <mranostay@xxxxxx>
>>> ---
>>> arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j7200-mcu-wakeup.dtsi | 2 +-
>>> arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j721e-mcu-wakeup.dtsi | 2 +-
>>> arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j721s2-mcu-wakeup.dtsi | 2 +-
>>> 3 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j7200-mcu-wakeup.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j7200-mcu-wakeup.dtsi
>>> index e5be78a58682..b5c666f98ba4 100644
>>> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j7200-mcu-wakeup.dtsi
>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j7200-mcu-wakeup.dtsi
>>> @@ -35,7 +35,7 @@ k3_reset: reset-controller {
>>> };
>>>
>>> mcu_conf: syscon@40f00000 {
>>> - compatible = "syscon", "simple-mfd";
>>> + compatible = "ti,j721e-system-controller", "syscon", "simple-mfd";
>>
>> That's a different SoC, so probably you should use dedicated compatible
>> here.
>
> Since there isn't any notable difference between these platforms for the simple-mfd
> controller I'm thinking it maybe makes sense to have a ti,generic-system-controller
> compatible. Thoughts?
Compatibles should be specific unless you and TI guarantee that chosen
one compatible will cover all future hardware from now till 100 years...
Best regards,
Krzysztof
