Re: [PATCH v4] ASoC: dt-bindings: ti,pcm3060: add descriptions and rename binding

[Kirill Marinushkin <k.marinushkin@gmail.com>]

Hello Padmashree,


Allow me to once more propose this description, which

was in the original .txt, and you included into the patch v1, but 
removed for v3:


 > + reg:

 > + maxItems: 1

 > + description: The I2C address of the device or SPI chip select number.


You also probably would like to squash patch v4 with the previous patch v3


Best regards,

Kirill


On 4/14/26 3:22 PM, Padmashree S S wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 14, 2026 at 12:09 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org> wrote:
>> On Tue, Apr 14, 2026 at 09:18:54AM +0530, Padmashree S S wrote:
>>> Add description to reg property and overall binding mentioning that this
>>> driver supports both I2C and SPI. Rename binding to match compatible
>>> naming convention.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Padmashree S S <padmashreess2006@gmail.com>
>>> ---
>>> Changes in v4:
>>>    - Rename binding from pcm3060 to ti,pcm3060
>>>    - Add binding description
>>>    - Add description to 'reg' property
>>>    - Remove unused label in example
>>>
>>> Changes in v3:
>>>    - Remove description from 'reg' property
>>> ---
>>>   .../bindings/sound/{pcm3060.yaml => ti,pcm3060.yaml}   | 10 +++++-----
>> What v4 is that of? There is no such file.
>>
>> Do not attach (thread) your patchsets to some other threads (unrelated
>> or older versions). This buries them deep in the mailbox and might
>> interfere with applying entire sets. See also:
>> https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.16-rc2/source/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst#L830
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Krzysztof
>>
> Thanks for pointing this out.
>
> Since this is a DT binding patch for the same pcm3060 device, I linked
> it to the previous version. However, I realize the subject changed
> significantly, which made the threading confusing.
>
> I’m planning to resend it as a new patch in a separate thread. Please
> let me know if that works.