On 05/06/2023 09:04, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Mon, Jun 5, 2023, at 08:35, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >> On 03/06/2023 22:02, Varshini Rajendran wrote: >>> Add sam9x60 compatible string support in the schema file >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Varshini Rajendran <varshini.rajendran@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>> --- >>> .../devicetree/bindings/soc/microchip/atmel,at91rm9200-tcb.yaml | 1 + >>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) >>> >>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/microchip/atmel,at91rm9200-tcb.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/microchip/atmel,at91rm9200-tcb.yaml >>> index a46411149571..c70c77a5e8e5 100644 >>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/microchip/atmel,at91rm9200-tcb.yaml >>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/microchip/atmel,at91rm9200-tcb.yaml >>> @@ -20,6 +20,7 @@ properties: >>> - atmel,at91rm9200-tcb >>> - atmel,at91sam9x5-tcb >>> - atmel,sama5d2-tcb >>> + - microchip,sam9x60-tcb >> >> No wildcards. > > sam9x60 is the actual name of the chip, it's no wildcard. For sam9x70, > sam9x72 and sam9x75, I think using sam9x7 as the compatible string > is probably fine, as long as they are actually the same chip. Again, > the 'x' in there is not a wildcard but part of the name. OK, if that's the case. Best regards, Krzysztof
