Re: [PATCH 2/3] dt-bindings: watchdog: realtek,otto-wdt: add compatible for RTL9607C

[Sander Vanheule <sander@svanheule.net>]

Hi,

On Sat, 2026-05-09 at 19:13 +0100, Conor Dooley wrote:
> On Sat, May 09, 2026 at 09:31:00PM +0500, Rustam Adilov wrote:
> > Add the realtek,rtl9607-wdt compatible to the Realtek Otto watchdog
> > binding.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Rustam Adilov <adilov@disroot.org>
> > ---
> >  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/watchdog/realtek,otto-wdt.yaml | 1 +
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> > 
> > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/watchdog/realtek,otto-
> > wdt.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/watchdog/realtek,otto-wdt.yaml
> > index 1f5390a67cdb..ac9db40b12dc 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/watchdog/realtek,otto-wdt.yaml
> > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/watchdog/realtek,otto-wdt.yaml
> > @@ -30,6 +30,7 @@ properties:
> >        - realtek,rtl8390-wdt
> >        - realtek,rtl9300-wdt
> >        - realtek,rtl9310-wdt
> > +      - realtek,rtl9607-wdt
> 
> Please explain in your commit message why this new device is not
> compatible with the existing ones, particularly given the driver patch
> implies that it would be.
> pw-bot: changes-requested

Back when I originally wrote this driver, device-specific compatibles were
encouraged "just in case" the hardware would turn out to behave differently.
Has this changed to minimizing the number of compatibles?

FWIW this platform's GPIO driver does have both SoC-specific compatibles and a
fallback, but for reasons lost to time this binding has no fallback. I'll submit
a patch to add a fallback for this binding too.


Best,
Sander