On 19/08/2023 22:19, Andreas Kemnade wrote: >>> +--- >>> +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/iio/adc/ti,twl6030-gpadc.yaml# >>> +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml# >>> + >>> +title: GPADC subsystem in the TWL6030 power module >>> + >>> +maintainers: >>> + - Jonathan Cameron <jic23@xxxxxxxxxx> >> >> This should be rather someone knowing or having or caring about this >> particular hardware, not subsystem maintainer. >> > Hmm, I have the twl6032, but not the twl6030. So probably > Tony (OMAP-Maintainer) or me? Yes. If you have a device, it's even better, but "caring about" or having datasheet is enough. > >>> + >>> +description: >>> + The GPADC subsystem in the TWL6030 consists of a 10-bit ADC >>> + combined with a 15-input analog multiplexer. >>> + >>> +properties: >>> + compatible: >>> + const: ti,twl6030-gpadc >> >> Devices look fairly similar. Same properties. Why aren't they in one >> binding (enum here instead)? >> > I hope it can be done. See commit message. Maybe my reasoning is wrong. The parent device binding can expect the compatible for the child and it will have the same effect in total as $ref to this binding. The only difference would be that running dtbs_check on parent binding would not spot all the issues in the child node. One need to run dtbs_check with both bindings. For an example: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/qcom,sm8450-mdss.yaml Best regards, Krzysztof
