From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-alma10-1.taild15c8.ts.net [100.103.45.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 68F963B2FC6; Thu, 2 Jul 2026 07:43:20 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1782978202; cv=none; b=T/8qOKewRESyN+vrE9oCE3pHkyYJ0SUiFKbZ5M+WbBpIGuFvxpwlr+ix/ERuHdPLYt5x7qnQ/H7DGBpm96dJ3LDPu/4ABk7mQ7mGZKlnKBPzs5Zz4REycy1w8QEytPCLCbBcOgV2APs7ICX0R8Zl104CaDRHAV7RoXFJ3YTkFxA= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1782978202; c=relaxed/simple; bh=rH+ajfe+rvPAYT5XzS1B7rNemJQPhlX6gUWSzcWbgLQ=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=APYWS5JNxGALjXA7VpVvlze8Jg1Ebp10e3/qock3vkzDI/W50ufmQJltRG+GCQ6Do49uGlhVsk7wlPbtR5N24M1YRYsAg/SSLGKKa6ifYiioPVXJ/yO67Uy03+sya9xWEv52ww4P5nQ7SYTUPkiFeIfhpIS54lXDt3IyhYAU3ww= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=QeKndD1j; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="QeKndD1j" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A82C71F000E9; Thu, 2 Jul 2026 07:43:18 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1782978199; bh=wB9kFnvBOQDELA0/LuNhygIBNyEdZSej8PAkRHVCjqE=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To; b=QeKndD1jWyB9gTZ81Av+/zXi5j2zbSXhrQTXLFHordVsRkH4deRZX8bPKCSyl5Yj4 zBuTuWtKj2W1PTTrMQnzTRDh9y5zGH71nfyvQ7nGQ5+nM/exM/LK38s8hyQWiv4ZC/ w/lF0KgRbM4gOY1skAcLSafV1hgRkGWzIGSqK+PhTkauzSJOossHdTODh5+8nvpaiv JbSj9OpdmcuSDkyWwc/zVQOGFZkcq8gmhRR348rR+JfMt3FRBcDVi0J+1pYT3ukc6L kBOuaVQ6gndpeZ9j97DHSiKtQQTwGugnc1XWqVJtA6PdGwKV+vUDapDJiO1XTCRzg4 vzS2Ftt0JJ7Tg== Date: Thu, 2 Jul 2026 09:43:16 +0200 From: Krzysztof Kozlowski To: 1579567540@qq.com Cc: Marc Kleine-Budde , linux-can@vger.kernel.org, Vincent Mailhol , kernel@pengutronix.de, Rob Herring , Krzysztof Kozlowski , Conor Dooley , Heiko Stuebner , devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] dt-bindings: can: rockchip: add rk3588v2 CAN-FD compatible Message-ID: <20260702-quantum-hairy-quail-e3eee4@quoll> References: <20260701070128.2096267-1-1579567540@qq.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: devicetree@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Wed, Jul 01, 2026 at 03:01:26PM +0800, 1579567540@qq.com wrote: > From: luch00 <1579567540@qq.com> > > The RK3588 CAN-FD controller uses the same DT properties as the > existing Rockchip CAN-FD blocks, so extend the current schema with a DT properties have nothing to do here. Are you saying it is fully compatible? Then express it properly with fallback. > SoC-specific rockchip,rk3588v2-canfd compatible instead of creating a > new binding file. > > Keep RK3588v2 as its own compatible rather than an rk3568v2 fallback. Do not explain what you did. Explain WHY. > Driver support uses separate match data and the RX FIFO count field Driver is irrelevant here. > layout differs from rk3568v2, so a dedicated compatible is the safer > description. > > Signed-off-by: luch00 <1579567540@qq.com> We do not take anonymous contributions. > --- > .../devicetree/bindings/net/can/rockchip,rk3568v2-canfd.yaml | 1 + > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/can/rockchip,rk3568v2-canfd.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/can/rockchip,rk3568v2-canfd.yaml > index a077c0330..aa31ec78e 100644 > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/can/rockchip,rk3568v2-canfd.yaml > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/can/rockchip,rk3568v2-canfd.yaml > @@ -17,6 +17,7 @@ properties: > compatible: > oneOf: > - const: rockchip,rk3568v2-canfd > + - const: rockchip,rk3588v2-canfd So that's just enum with previous entry And why is this different from rk3588? > - items: > - const: rockchip,rk3568v3-canfd > - const: rockchip,rk3568v2-canfd > -- > 2.34.1 >