On Fri, 2023-10-13 at 08:46 +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > Hi Krzysztof, Thank you for assisting with the review. > External email : Please do not click links or open attachments until > you have verified the sender or the content. > On 12/10/2023 10:40, Moudy Ho wrote: > > > > > +allOf: > > + - if: > > + properties: > > + compatible: > > + contains: > > + const: mediatek,mt8183-mdp3-rdma > > + > > + then: > > + properties: > > + clocks: > > + items: > > + - description: RDMA clock > > + - description: RSZ clock (shared SRAM with RDMA) > > + > > + mboxes: > > + items: > > + - description: used for 1st data pipe from RDMA > > + - description: used for 2nd data pipe from RDMA > > interrupts: > false > As Angelo provided additional clarification in [15/16], explaining that certain conditions in [2/16] and [3/16] were intentionally omitted due to the need to integrate the same IP with different operations. Apologies for any inconvenience this has caused you. > > + > > + required: > > + - mboxes > > + - mediatek,gce-events > > + > > + - if: > > + properties: > > + compatible: > > + contains: > > + const: mediatek,mt8195-vdo1-rdma > > + > > + then: > > + properties: > > + clocks: > > + items: > > + - description: RDMA clock > > mboxes: false > mediatek,gce-events: false > > I am not so sure it is actually "simpler" to merge these. They are > quite > different. You will end up with unmanageable allOf with a lot of > branches (which supposedly you want to remove). > > Upon examining the minor hardware changes in MDP for MT8183 and MT8195 RDMA ([3/16]), it appears that branching cannot be avoided. However, consolidating these changes has the additional advantage of addressing Rob's concerns from v4. Perhaps we can consider the current changes as a form of progress. Sincerely, Moudy > > + > > additionalProperties: false > > > > examples: > > Best regards, > Krzysztof >
