On 05/02/2024 17:43, Marco Felsch wrote: > This binding descripes the generic TCPCI specification [1]. So add the Typo: describes. No, this binding describes PTN5110, not generic TCPCI. This is not accurate commit description. > generic binding support since which can be used if an different TCPC is > used compatible which is compatible to [1]. Sorry, cannot parse it. Please run it through native speaker, Google grammar check, ChatGPT or some other way. > > [1] https://www.usb.org/sites/default/files/documents/usb-port_controller_specification_rev2.0_v1.0_0.pdf > > Signed-off-by: Marco Felsch <m.felsch@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > --- > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/nxp,ptn5110.yaml | 4 +++- > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/nxp,ptn5110.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/nxp,ptn5110.yaml > index eaedb4cc6b6c..7bd7bbbac9e0 100644 > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/nxp,ptn5110.yaml > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/nxp,ptn5110.yaml > @@ -11,7 +11,9 @@ maintainers: > > properties: > compatible: > - const: nxp,ptn5110 > + enum: > + - nxp,ptn5110 > + - tcpci I don't think this is correct. First, this is binding for NXP chip, so why generic implementation should be here? I would expect it in its own dedicated binding. Second, we rarely want generic compatibles. Care to share more details? Are all details expected to follow spec, without need of quirks? Best regards, Krzysztof
