On Fri, Jun 7, 2024 at 5:33 AM Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi, > > > > > > > +properties: > > > > > > + compatible: > > > > > > + oneOf: > > > > > > + - const: loongson,ls1b-nfc > > > > > > > > > > What is the rationale behind this choice? Seems like the b variant has > > > > > two possible implementations and should always be preceded by a more > > > > > specific compatible. > > > > > > > > > > As there is currently no description of this controller upstream, I > > > > > would not care too much about any out-of-tree description and directly > > > > > go for a clean description. > > > > > > > > > Excuse me, should I add a description for this property? > > > > > > No, description is not needed. But you are allowing the > > > "loongson,ls1b-nfc" compatible alone, which I think is not relevant, > > > unless you convince me it is :-) > > > > > "loongson,ls1b-nfc" itself is a specific implementation. > > I was suggested to set up a fallback before. > > https://lore.kernel.org/all/20231007-untapped-masses-01f80b7c13c7@spud/ > > Then "loongson,ls1b-nfc" became the fallback. > > You cannot allow 'the fallback', alone. But this is what you do above. > Below description is fine. Just don't allow the ls1b-nfc compatible > alone. > Sorry. I still don't get this. According to https://lore.kernel.org/all/20221212163532.142533-2-krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx/, the generic fallback should not be used alone. In contrast, the specific fallback has to be used alone, as I understand it. If not, could you please show me the right way? Thanks very much! > Thanks, > Miquèl -- Best regards, Keguang Zhang
