On Wed, 26 Jun 2024 17:06:48 +0100 Conor Dooley <conor@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, Jun 25, 2024 at 10:21:06PM +0530, Kaustabh Chakraborty wrote: > > Add the compatible string of stk3013 to the existing list. > > > > Signed-off-by: Kaustabh Chakraborty <kauschluss@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/light/stk33xx.yaml | 1 + > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > > > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/light/stk33xx.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/light/stk33xx.yaml > > index f6e22dc9814a..6003da66a7e6 100644 > > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/light/stk33xx.yaml > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/light/stk33xx.yaml > > @@ -19,6 +19,7 @@ allOf: > > properties: > > compatible: > > enum: > > + - sensortek,stk3013 > > The driver change suggests that this device is compatible with the > existing sensors. > Jonathan, could we relax the warning during init > ret = stk3310_check_chip_id(chipid); > if (ret < 0) > dev_warn(&client->dev, "unknown chip id: 0x%x\n", chipid); > and allow fallback compatibles here please? Yes. Please do. This dates back to when my understanding on what counted as fallback compatible and we are fixing that in drivers as we touch them to add new parts. > > > - sensortek,stk3310 > > - sensortek,stk3311 > > - sensortek,stk3335 > > -- > > 2.45.2 > >
