On 29/07/23 12:55 am, Rob Herring wrote: > EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe > > On Fri, Jul 28, 2023 at 04:01:06PM +0530, Varshini Rajendran wrote: >> Add documentation for SAM9X75 Curiosity board. >> >> Signed-off-by: Varshini Rajendran <varshini.rajendran@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> --- >> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/atmel-at91.yaml | 6 ++++++ >> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/atmel-at91.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/atmel-at91.yaml >> index dfb8fd089197..15b11feae46a 100644 >> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/atmel-at91.yaml >> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/atmel-at91.yaml >> @@ -99,6 +99,12 @@ properties: >> - const: microchip,sam9x60 >> - const: atmel,at91sam9 >> >> + - description: Microchip SAM9X7 Evaluation Boards >> + items: >> + - const: microchip,sam9x75-curiosity >> + - const: microchip,sam9x7 >> + - const: atmel,at91sam9 > > Has this compatible been useful in prior use? Can s/w make some decision > based on it? If not, I'd drop it. Hi Rob, There is no s/w decision depending on this compatible per se. But this is how we have maintained different boards from the same SoC or SoC family so far. So I would say, any decision on this would require discussion internally. > > Rob -- Thanks and Regards, Varshini Rajendran.
