On Mon, Aug 07, 2023 at 10:03:45AM -0600, James Hilliard wrote: > On Wed, Jul 26, 2023 at 12:26 PM Conor Dooley <conor@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Wed, Jul 26, 2023 at 06:37:39AM -0600, James Hilliard wrote: > > > Add support for Variscite i.MX6Q VAR-SOM-MX6 SoM with Custom Board. > > > > > > Cc: Pierluigi Passaro <pierluigi.p@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > Signed-off-by: James Hilliard <james.hilliard1@xxxxxxxxx> > > > --- > > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/fsl.yaml | 6 ++++++ > > > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+) > > > > > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/fsl.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/fsl.yaml > > > index 2510eaa8906d..76bb098605e7 100644 > > > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/fsl.yaml > > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/fsl.yaml > > > @@ -385,6 +385,12 @@ properties: > > > - const: toradex,apalis_imx6q > > > - const: fsl,imx6q > > > > > > + - description: i.MX6Q Variscite VAR-SOM-MX6 Boards > > > + items: > > > + - const: variscite,mx6customboard > > > + - const: variscite,var-som-imx6q > > > + - const: fsl,imx6q > > > > I find it hard to tell what the sort order here is meant to be, but it > > appears to be first by what I.MX processor and then by the board > > compatibles? If so, this is added out of order. > > Ordering follows the same pattern as say the "Variscite VAR-SOM-MX8MM > based boards", should it be different? What I meant was I was not sure whether things were being sorted by the contents of the description or by the compatible strings. I don't really care which it is, I was hoping for an fsl platform maintainer to weigh in. If I hadn't already given one, Acked-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> for whatever way is opted for. > > > - description: TQ-Systems TQMa6Q SoM (variant A) on MBa6x > > > items: > > > - const: tq,imx6q-mba6x-a > > > -- > > > 2.34.1 > > >
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
