Hi Tudor, On 26/02/24 2:39 pm, Tudor Ambarus wrote: > EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe > > On 23.02.2024 19:26, Varshini Rajendran wrote: >> Remove microchip,sam9x60-spi compatible from the list as the driver used >> has the compatible atmel,at91rm9200-spi and sam9x60 devices also use the >> same compatible as fallback. So removing the microchip,sam9x60-spi >> compatible from the list since it is not needed. >> > > I find this wrong. I though we shall add compatibles for each SoC. Are > the registers and fields the same for the SPI IPs in these 2 SoCs? Even > if they are the same, are you sure the IPs are integrated in the same way? Which two SoCs are you referring to ? I am not removing the device specific compatible. I am only removing the additional fallback compatible. As in, compatible = "microchip,sam9x7-spi", "atmel,at91rm9200-spi"; instead of, compatible = "microchip,sam9x7-spi", "microchip,sam9x60-spi", "atmel,at91rm9200-spi"; for the sam9x7 devices. Hope this is clear. If I have it wrong please let me know. > >> Signed-off-by: Varshini Rajendran <varshini.rajendran@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> --- >> Changes in v4: >> - Elaborated the explanation in the commit message to justify the patch >> --- >> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/atmel,at91rm9200-spi.yaml | 1 - >> 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/atmel,at91rm9200-spi.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/atmel,at91rm9200-spi.yaml >> index 58367587bfbc..32e7c14033c2 100644 >> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/atmel,at91rm9200-spi.yaml >> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/atmel,at91rm9200-spi.yaml >> @@ -22,7 +22,6 @@ properties: >> - const: atmel,at91rm9200-spi >> - items: >> - const: microchip,sam9x7-spi >> - - const: microchip,sam9x60-spi >> - const: atmel,at91rm9200-spi >> >> reg: -- Thanks and Regards, Varshini Rajendran.
