On 05/05/2023 09:17, Bharat Bhushan wrote: >> Same story every time... and was discussed many, many times on the lists. >> >> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https- >> 3A__elixir.bootlin.com_linux_v6.1- >> 2Drc1_source_Documentation_devicetree_bindings_writing-2Dbindings.rst- >> 23L42&d=DwICaQ&c=nKjWec2b6R0mOyPaz7xtfQ&r=PAAlWswPe7d8gHlGbCLmy >> 2YezyK7O3Hv_t2heGnouBw&m=3aeejmHQ5C8TyLM5odlaq6KnLYHt4PhpJp70FQa >> qbNf7w15KFHA3fmeDR2V-en4m&s=FKeW5tpOG- >> CJoV_JKuqTa0k_tRrYWAQZG1UfqlW3c74&e= >> >> You need anyway SoC specific compatibles. Once you add proper compatibles, >> you will see that property is not needed. > > Looks odd to add N number of compatible for N socs belong to one class of soc, but anyways will do. Why this is odd? How does it differ from other SoCs? Best regards, Krzysztof
