On 22/01/2024 18:40, Rafał Miłecki wrote: > On 22.01.2024 14:19, Matthias Brugger wrote: >> On 22/01/2024 13:49, Rafał Miłecki wrote: >>> From: Rafał Miłecki <rafal@xxxxxxxxxx> >>> >>> This helps validating DTS files. Introduced changes: >>> 1. Reworded title >>> 2. Dropper redundant properties descriptions >>> 3. Added required #include and adjusted "reg" in example >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Rafał Miłecki <rafal@xxxxxxxxxx> >>> --- >>> .../bindings/rtc/mediatek,mt2712-rtc.yaml | 39 +++++++++++++++++++ >>> .../devicetree/bindings/rtc/rtc-mt2712.txt | 14 ------- >>> 2 files changed, 39 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-) >>> create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/mediatek,mt2712-rtc.yaml >>> delete mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/rtc-mt2712.txt >>> >>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/mediatek,mt2712-rtc.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/mediatek,mt2712-rtc.yaml >> >> In this schema can easily fit "mediatek,mt7622-rtc", so how about renaming it and add reference for that RTC as well? > > I see your point but by looking at existing Linux drivers: > drivers/rtc/rtc-mt2712.c > drivers/rtc/rtc-mt7622.c > it seems like quite different hardware blocks. > > Different registers, different programming, clk in MT7622. > > Should they really share a YAML binding just because they use similar > properties? Hardware aspect matters more, including features not yet present in the binding, like some power on/off control. Different clock inputs is also an argument. Best regards, Krzysztof
