On Wed, May 24, 2023 at 02:47:59PM -0700, Justin Chen wrote: > On Tue, May 23, 2023 at 11:56 PM Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Gotcha. I got something like this now. > > compatible: > oneOf: > - items: > - enum: > - brcm,bcm74165-asp > - const: brcm,asp-v2.1 > - items: > - enum: > - brcm,bcm72165-asp > - const: brcm,asp-v2.0 Yes, this is what I had in mind. > Apologies, still getting used to this yaml stuff. Starting to make a > bit more sense to me now. No worries. > > > valid fallback for "brcm,asp-v2.1"? > > > The oneOf: also becomes redundant since you only have one items:. > > > > > > > Will submit a v5 tomorrow. > > > > > > BTW, when you do, could you use the address listed in MAINTAINERS rather > > > than the one you used for this version? > > > > I changed the address listed in MAINTAINERS from the previous versions > of this patchset. The current version should match the address that > this patch set was sent from. Looks like I forgot to add a changelog > for that in v4. Hmm, I must not have been clear. You sent it to <conor@xxxxxxxxxx> and I was hoping that you would use <conor+dt@xxxxxxxxxx> instead so that you end up hitting the right mail filters :) It's not a problem, I was just added to it in -rc1 so get_maintainer.pl probably didn't spit my name out for your original revision. Thanks, Conor.
