On 08/03/2024 09:02, Yang Xiwen wrote: > On 3/8/2024 4:01 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >> On 07/03/2024 12:34, Yang Xiwen via B4 Relay wrote: >>> From: Yang Xiwen <forbidden405@xxxxxxxxxxx> >>> >>> HiSilicon FEMAC core is also found on Hi3798MV200 SoC. Document it in >>> binding. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Yang Xiwen <forbidden405@xxxxxxxxxxx> >>> >>> # Conflicts: >>> # Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/hisilicon,hisi-femac.yaml >> Drop >> >>> --- >>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/hisilicon,hisi-femac.yaml | 1 + >>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) >>> >>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/hisilicon,hisi-femac.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/hisilicon,hisi-femac.yaml >>> index 5cd2331668bc..4f8a07864eb4 100644 >>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/hisilicon,hisi-femac.yaml >>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/hisilicon,hisi-femac.yaml >>> @@ -16,6 +16,7 @@ properties: >>> compatible: >>> enum: >>> - hisilicon,hi3516cv300-femac >>> + - hisilicon,hi3798mv200-femac >> As I asked two or three or four times: please express compatibility >> (oneOf, items). Your driver suggests that they are compatible. If they >> are not compatible, mention it in commit msg, but so far it suggests >> they are compatible. > > > They are compatible as far as i see. Sorry, that's not a Schroedinger's cat. Either it seems compatible or it is not. You cannot say here "compatible as far as I see" and in second thread say "If we are not going to keep backward compatibility". Hardware is fixed, released, done. Best regards, Krzysztof
