Re: [PATCH v3 1/7] dt-bindings: embedded-controller: document ASUS Transformer EC

[Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>]

On 17/02/2026 15:29, Svyatoslav Ryhel wrote:
>>>>> properties:
>>>>>   compatible:
>>>>>       - items:
>>>>>           - enum:
>>>>>               - asus,p1801-t-ec-pad
>>>>>               - asus,sl101-ec-dock
>>>>>               - asus,tf101-ec-dock
>>>>>               - asus,tf101g-ec-dock
>>>>>               - asus,tf201-ec-dock
>>>>>               - asus,tf201-ec-pad
>>>>>               - asus,tf300t-ec-dock
>>>>>               - asus,tf300t-ec-pad
>>>>>               - asus,tf300tg-ec-dock
>>>>>               - asus,tf300tg-ec-pad
>>>>>               - asus,tf300tl-ec-dock
>>>>>               - asus,tf300tl-ec-pad
>>>>>               - asus,tf700t-ec-dock
>>>>>               - asus,tf700t-ec-pad
>>>>>               - asus,tf600t-ec-pad
>>>>>               - asus,tf701t-ec-pad
>>>>>           - const: asus,transformer-ec
>>>>>
>>>>> And them schema name will match the genetic compatible.
>>>>
>>>> Then what does the generic compatible express?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Then enum it is
>>
>>
>> Why would you do that, instead of what I posted earlier in the thread?
>> If you send a flat enum with all devices listed, I'm gonna just be there
>> telling you to consolidate into one device-specific fallback compatible
>> per programming model.
> 
> There is no one device-specific fallback compatible! Schema describes
> HARDWARE not drivers no? I will not use random device compatible from

You came with "asus,transformer-ec" as fallback which is same random
choice, so how one random device is okay, but other not? We asked to use
some meaningful device as fallback, to the best of current knowledge.

> the list as a fallback compatible for a different random unrelated
> device, that is plain wrong. Discuss this with Krzysztof and come up
> with something meaningful please.

It is not pleasant to review your patches. This happened in the past [1]
and recently is not getting better. In multiple threads. Receiving
half-baked responses to actual review questions means you do not value
our time. I think you somehow annoyed, offended or wasted time of all
three DT maintainers.

Well, sure, happens.

Just understand there might be a reason when your patches do not receive
attention or reviews.

[1]
https://lore.kernel.org/r/CAPVz0n09ZP1i2tasdTvnt8RvjhALvUYjv9u_EGRtnXPOYQtuqQ@mail.gmail.com/

Best regards,
Krzysztof