Re: [PATCH v3 2/3] dt-bindings: lcdif: Expand the imx6sl/imx6sll fallbacks

[Marek Vasut <marex@xxxxxxx>]

On 10/29/24 8:16 PM, Fabio Estevam wrote:
> From: Fabio Estevam <festevam@xxxxxxx>
>
> mx6sl.dtsi and imx6sll.dtsi have the following lcdif entries:
>
> compatible = "fsl,imx6sl-lcdif", "fsl,imx28-lcdif";
>
> This causes dt-schema warnings as the current binding only
> allow 'fsl,imx6sx-lcdif' as fallback.
>
> ['fsl,imx6sl-lcdif', 'fsl,imx28-lcdif'] is too long
> ['fsl,imx6sll-lcdif', 'fsl,imx28-lcdif'] is too long
>
> The imx6sx-lcdif programming model has more advanced features, such
> as overlay plane and the CRC32 support than the imx28-lcdif IP.
>
> Expand the imx6sl/imx6sll lcdif fallbacks to accept a less specific
> fsl,imx28-lcdif fallback:
>
> compatible = "fsl,imx6sl-lcdif", "fsl,imx6sx-lcdif", "fsl,imx28-lcdif";
>
> This helps keeping DT compatibility as well as using the more advanced
> lcdif features found on imx6sl and imx6sll.
>
> Signed-off-by: Fabio Estevam <festevam@xxxxxxx>
> ---
> Changes since v2:
> - Make the three compatible entres the only valid combination
> for imx6sl and imx6sll (Andreas).
>
>   Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/fsl,lcdif.yaml | 8 ++++++--
>   1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/fsl,lcdif.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/fsl,lcdif.yaml
> index ad0cca562463..72e509bc975b 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/fsl,lcdif.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/fsl,lcdif.yaml
> @@ -23,14 +23,18 @@ properties:
>             - fsl,imx93-lcdif
>         - items:
>             - enum:
> -              - fsl,imx6sl-lcdif
> -              - fsl,imx6sll-lcdif
>                 - fsl,imx6ul-lcdif
>                 - fsl,imx7d-lcdif
>                 - fsl,imx8mm-lcdif
>                 - fsl,imx8mn-lcdif
>                 - fsl,imx8mq-lcdif
>             - const: fsl,imx6sx-lcdif
> +      - items:
> +          - enum:
> +              - fsl,imx6sl-lcdif
> +              - fsl,imx6sll-lcdif
> +          - const: fsl,imx6sx-lcdif
> +          - const: fsl,imx28-lcdif
Shouldn't this be

- enum:
  - fsl,imx6sl-lcdif
  - fsl,imx6sll-lcdif
  - fsl,imx6sx-lcdif
- const: fsl,imx28-lcdif

So you wouldn't have to write three compatible strings for the 6sl/sll , 
but only two ? I.e. this:

compatible = "fsl,imx6sl-lcdif", "fsl,imx28-lcdif";
compatible = "fsl,imx6sll-lcdif", "fsl,imx28-lcdif";
compatible = "fsl,imx6sx-lcdif", "fsl,imx28-lcdif";

?