From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from srv01.abscue.de (abscue.de [89.58.28.240]) (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 326173EBF15; Sat, 21 Feb 2026 13:02:47 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=89.58.28.240 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1771678970; cv=none; b=ZxRu3JgZAVIvAMe1AnbRi1uGkGi9pQiHO1JmS9rG4qp3h5aKpIaE8OG5htKvoqEp8LTwl6maD5ZrwvwfxsAu3LMBLU3gQ5JLtOXaUsflXZMdxsX+58jBB3edz7yIq1VsmSpmqnyr7TIm/pCF6OApFJ0zyt4JkfG1Uw9tpP+y7g0= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1771678970; c=relaxed/simple; bh=wx0eRq++ol8ozeO7U1m0YPWmjqmaF0HgVfKlAf6yNq8=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=H/zZUuP05TXZElWoiizh0mETV07tTDeR8Y0MGoAIiId7CmI457JxIrNdzGPBf34XLNwCX8JntHqAIrMWux4hwecbv+reX9OJewzJBQg8JqsLT3Lw5cb6XRee4UN6PSuOVDiD1IW82oA8Z3byX18BjvroaJ0ptUi4VTNLs5M2wq4= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=abscue.de; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=abscue.de; dkim=fail (0-bit key) header.d=abscue.de header.i=@abscue.de header.b=bLVlq1xo reason="key not found in DNS"; arc=none smtp.client-ip=89.58.28.240 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=abscue.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=abscue.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="key not found in DNS" (0-bit key) header.d=abscue.de header.i=@abscue.de header.b="bLVlq1xo" Date: Sat, 21 Feb 2026 14:02:40 +0100 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=abscue.de; s=dkim; t=1771678966; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=9AesSLY8VVsTepycBvPYCi00unG+x9TWHa4lZPMkHa0=; b=bLVlq1xox6BqgXB+NfZc46JRul6UWIRMaqa6c+1WmchdB+D6sxboMkoUjoiQG9FZVIx36u haEXfgFsfp5bLIWAkGwDu9lTj+Wu/GvYe3c0CGZMO4wmjMI4GG50wMhIDCc7J2EA0XHSbE Y47+H9prWxJg4gyDSweVczl1QNE+y7Qk4JmC19RY8msZbq+6HrMleX9onMHQLuEl+0jRbp zx8DkVTuh1sqNbXEMP+pQ1KsRt6l5Emajf4ZBqs8X8ruOVkUBorHW6Db3E2MftPR/wYJUZ OgFA3f21bvcW00oLQSgfHIT7CSB2eNB8nx1epmITwPD5tZrAY2DfJuUXdbDg9Q== From: Otto =?iso-8859-1?Q?Pfl=FCger?= To: Krzysztof Kozlowski Cc: Liam Girdwood , Mark Brown , Rob Herring , Krzysztof Kozlowski , Conor Dooley , Orson Zhai , Baolin Wang , Chunyan Zhang , Lee Jones , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] dt-bindings: regulator: Document Unisoc SC2730 PMIC bindings Message-ID: References: <20260220-sc2730-regulators-v1-0-3f2bbc9ecf14@abscue.de> <20260220-sc2730-regulators-v1-1-3f2bbc9ecf14@abscue.de> <20260221-crimson-beaver-of-discourse-7ef24d@quoll> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: devicetree@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20260221-crimson-beaver-of-discourse-7ef24d@quoll> On Sat, Feb 21, 2026 at 11:52:55AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > [...] > > +properties: > > + compatible: > > + const: sprd,sc2730-regulator > > Let's drop the compatible (which changes my comment on other patch as > you can put only $ref in oneOf). Sorry, I don't quite understand this part. It seems that you are suggesting to change the top-level MFD bindings in the other patch to look like this: regulators: type: object oneOf: - $ref: /schemas/regulator/sprd,sc2730-regulator.yaml# - $ref: /schemas/regulator/sprd,sc2731-regulator.yaml# If that's the case, how should the regulator bindings for SC2730 be distinguished from SC2731 without the compatible? Would it be fine to keep the compatible here if I drop the additional if/then constraints in the other patch?