On 04/04/2024 12:30, Andreas Kemnade wrote: > On Thu, 4 Apr 2024 08:59:54 +0200 > Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> On 02/04/2024 21:35, Andreas Kemnade wrote: >>> As this chip was seen in several devices in the wild, add it. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Andreas Kemnade <andreas@xxxxxxxxxxxx> >>> Suggested-by: Matti Vaittinen <mazziesaccount@xxxxxxxxx> >>> --- >>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/rohm,bd71828-pmic.yaml | 4 +++- >>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/rohm,bd71828-pmic.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/rohm,bd71828-pmic.yaml >>> index 0b62f854bf6b..e4df09e8961c 100644 >>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/rohm,bd71828-pmic.yaml >>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/rohm,bd71828-pmic.yaml >>> @@ -17,7 +17,9 @@ description: | >>> >>> properties: >>> compatible: >>> - const: rohm,bd71828 >>> + enum: >>> + - rohm,bd71828 >>> + - rohm,bd71879 >> >> In your second commit you claim they are compatible, so why they are not >> marked as such? >> > so you mean allowing > > compatible = "rohm,bd71828" > and > compatible = "rohm,bd71879", "rohm,bd71828" Yes. If there are reasons against, please briefly mention them in commit msg. Best regards, Krzysztof
