On 19/05/2024 22:27, Francesco Dolcini wrote: > Hello Krzysztof, > thanks for the review. > > On Sun, May 19, 2024 at 07:38:07PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >> On 17/05/2024 13:11, Parth Pancholi wrote: >>> From: Parth Pancholi <parth.pancholi@xxxxxxxxxxx> >>> >>> Add a compatible entry for the TI TMUXHS4212 GPIO-based >>> bidirectional 2:1 mux/1:2 demux which can be used for >>> switching orientation of the SBU lines in USB Type-C >>> applications. >>> >>> TMUXHS4212 datasheet: https://www.ti.com/lit/ds/symlink/tmuxhs4212.pdf >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Parth Pancholi <parth.pancholi@xxxxxxxxxxx> >>> --- >>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/gpio-sbu-mux.yaml | 1 + >>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) >> >> Where is an user of this? > > The Linux driver (drivers/usb/typec/mux/gpio-sbu-mux.c) is using only > "gpio-sbu-mux", just in case you did not check yourself already. > > As of now there is no DT file in-tree using this new compatible, FWIW > "onnn,fsusb43l10x" in the same file is not used by anybody. From some > old discussion here [1] (not exactly the same - I know, and coming not > from a DT kernel maintainer) I assumed that it was fine to send such > a change. > > If it's not the case we'll send the patch later on, however some > DT files maintainers (e.g. arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/) have a policy to > just accept DT file in which the binding changes are already merged > therefore I was trying to be a little bit proactive here. TI? Never heard something like this from them... Such requirement would seriously slow down any work, so it's not really reasonable. Expectation is to post both binding change and an user, so DTS, in case of USB in separate patchsets. Otherwise you will get such questions, so your biondings patches also won't have easy path to merging... Acked-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx> Best regards, Krzysztof
