On 14/05/2024 22:54, Eddie James wrote: > +properties: > + compatible: > + enum: > + - ibm,i2c-fsi > + > + reg: > + items: > + - description: FSI slave address > + > + "#address-cells": > + const: 1 > + > + "#size-cells": > + const: 0 > + > +patternProperties: > + "^i2c(@.*)?": Either you have or you have not unit addresses. Please fix the pattern. Why is this so flexible? Do you want to deprecate i2c-bus in favor of i2c? If so, then example should use new naming. I am fine with children as i2c-bus, assuming this is allowed by dtschema. Did you actually test it? Best regards, Krzysztof
