Re: [PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: iio: adc: rtq6056: add support for the whole RTQ6056 family

Krzysztof Kozlowski
2023-12-28T07:09:38Z

On 28/12/2023 04:19, ChiYuan Huang wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 26, 2023 at 01:12:50PM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 26/12/2023 12:19, ChiYuan Huang wrote:
>>> On Tue, Dec 26, 2023 at 10:18:47AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>>> On 26/12/2023 04:47, cy_huang@richtek.com wrote:
>>>>> From: ChiYuan Huang <cy_huang@richtek.com>
>>>>>
>>>>> Add compatible support for RTQ6053 and RTQ6059.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: ChiYuan Huang <cy_huang@richtek.com>
>>>>> ---
>>>>> .../devicetree/bindings/iio/adc/richtek,rtq6056.yaml | 5 ++++-
>>>>> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/adc/richtek,rtq6056.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/adc/richtek,rtq6056.yaml
>>>>> index 88e008629ea8..d1e1f36d1972 100644
>>>>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/adc/richtek,rtq6056.yaml
>>>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/adc/richtek,rtq6056.yaml
>>>>> @@ -25,7 +25,10 @@ description: |
>>>>>
>>>>> properties:
>>>>> compatible:
>>>>> - const: richtek,rtq6056
>>>>> + enum:
>>>>> + - richtek,rtq6053
>>>>> + - richtek,rtq6056
>>>>
>>>> Aren't these devices compatible? Your driver change says they are, so
>>>> express compatibility with list here (and oneOf).
>>>>
>>> Thanks, I try to take other binding as the reference. One more question.
>>> If rtq6053 is compatible with rtq6056, there's only chip package type difference.
>>> Do I need to seperate it into a dedicated enum element?
>>> Or just put it into one item and said this part number is compatible with rtq6056?
>>
>> See example-schema. You need enum and items, both in oneOf:.
>>
> After reading the 'example-schema', I Still cannot understand what the special case items
> means.

What is "special case items"?

>
> But in my case, is the below change correct?
> [Diff]
> properties:
> compatible:
> - enum:
> - - richtek,rtq6053
> - - richtek,rtq6056
> - - richtek,rtq6059
> + oneOf:
> + - items:
> + - enum:
> + - richtek,rtq6053
> + - richtek,rtq6056
> + - richtek,rtq6059

This changes nothing, you still have just one item. The example-schema
has exactly that case, so why you are coding it differently?

Anyway, test your DTS with the fallback, you will see that above does
not work.

Best regards,
Krzysztof