The NXP PTN5110 [1] is an TCPCI [2] compatible chip, so add the fallback
binding.
[1] https://www.nxp.com/docs/en/data-sheet/PTN5110.pdf
[2] https://www.usb.org/sites/default/files/documents/usb-port_controller_specification_rev2.0_v1.0_0.pdf
Signed-off-by: Marco Felsch <[email protected]>
---
v2:
- rephrase commit message
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/nxp,ptn5110.yaml | 4 +++-
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/nxp,ptn5110.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/nxp,ptn5110.yaml
index eaedb4cc6b6c..7bd7bbbac9e0 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/nxp,ptn5110.yaml
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/nxp,ptn5110.yaml
@@ -11,7 +11,9 @@ maintainers:
properties:
compatible:
- const: nxp,ptn5110
+ enum:
+ - nxp,ptn5110
+ - tcpci
reg:
maxItems: 1
--
2.39.2
On 15/02/2024 22:28, Marco Felsch wrote:
> The NXP PTN5110 [1] is an TCPCI [2] compatible chip, so add the fallback
> binding.
>
> [1] https://www.nxp.com/docs/en/data-sheet/PTN5110.pdf
> [2] https://www.usb.org/sites/default/files/documents/usb-port_controller_specification_rev2.0_v1.0_0.pdf
>
> Signed-off-by: Marco Felsch <[email protected]>
> ---
> v2:
> - rephrase commit message
>
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/nxp,ptn5110.yaml | 4 +++-
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/nxp,ptn5110.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/nxp,ptn5110.yaml
> index eaedb4cc6b6c..7bd7bbbac9e0 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/nxp,ptn5110.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/nxp,ptn5110.yaml
> @@ -11,7 +11,9 @@ maintainers:
>
> properties:
> compatible:
> - const: nxp,ptn5110
> + enum:
> + - nxp,ptn5110
> + - tcpci
That's not a fallback, but enum. Fallback is "items" and then you could
also send a follow-up patchset (separate, so Greg won't take it) fixing
DTS (if not, let me know, so I will fix it).
Best regards,
Krzysztof
On 24-02-22, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 15/02/2024 22:28, Marco Felsch wrote:
> > The NXP PTN5110 [1] is an TCPCI [2] compatible chip, so add the fallback
> > binding.
> >
> > [1] https://www.nxp.com/docs/en/data-sheet/PTN5110.pdf
> > [2] https://www.usb.org/sites/default/files/documents/usb-port_controller_specification_rev2.0_v1.0_0.pdf
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Marco Felsch <[email protected]>
> > ---
> > v2:
> > - rephrase commit message
> >
> > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/nxp,ptn5110.yaml | 4 +++-
> > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/nxp,ptn5110.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/nxp,ptn5110.yaml
> > index eaedb4cc6b6c..7bd7bbbac9e0 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/nxp,ptn5110.yaml
> > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/nxp,ptn5110.yaml
> > @@ -11,7 +11,9 @@ maintainers:
> >
> > properties:
> > compatible:
> > - const: nxp,ptn5110
> > + enum:
> > + - nxp,ptn5110
> > + - tcpci
>
> That's not a fallback, but enum. Fallback is "items" and then you could
Damn, you're right. Sorry.
> also send a follow-up patchset (separate, so Greg won't take it) fixing
> DTS (if not, let me know, so I will fix it).
Sry. but I don't get this. Why do I need to send a follow-up? Greg did
not apply anything, at least I didn't received an e-mail, that this
patchset was picked.
Regards,
Marco
>
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof
>
>
On 24-02-22, Marco Felsch wrote:
> On 24-02-22, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > On 15/02/2024 22:28, Marco Felsch wrote:
> > > The NXP PTN5110 [1] is an TCPCI [2] compatible chip, so add the fallback
> > > binding.
> > >
> > > [1] https://www.nxp.com/docs/en/data-sheet/PTN5110.pdf
> > > [2] https://www.usb.org/sites/default/files/documents/usb-port_controller_specification_rev2.0_v1.0_0.pdf
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Marco Felsch <[email protected]>
> > > ---
> > > v2:
> > > - rephrase commit message
> > >
> > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/nxp,ptn5110.yaml | 4 +++-
> > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/nxp,ptn5110.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/nxp,ptn5110.yaml
> > > index eaedb4cc6b6c..7bd7bbbac9e0 100644
> > > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/nxp,ptn5110.yaml
> > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/nxp,ptn5110.yaml
> > > @@ -11,7 +11,9 @@ maintainers:
> > >
> > > properties:
> > > compatible:
> > > - const: nxp,ptn5110
> > > + enum:
> > > + - nxp,ptn5110
> > > + - tcpci
> >
> > That's not a fallback, but enum. Fallback is "items" and then you could
>
> Damn, you're right. Sorry.
>
> > also send a follow-up patchset (separate, so Greg won't take it) fixing
> > DTS (if not, let me know, so I will fix it).
>
> Sry. but I don't get this. Why do I need to send a follow-up? Greg did
> not apply anything, at least I didn't received an e-mail, that this
> patchset was picked.
Got it now and made it this way.
Regards,
Marco
On 22/02/2024 21:23, Marco Felsch wrote:
> On 24-02-22, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 15/02/2024 22:28, Marco Felsch wrote:
>>> The NXP PTN5110 [1] is an TCPCI [2] compatible chip, so add the fallback
>>> binding.
>>>
>>> [1] https://www.nxp.com/docs/en/data-sheet/PTN5110.pdf
>>> [2] https://www.usb.org/sites/default/files/documents/usb-port_controller_specification_rev2.0_v1.0_0.pdf
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Marco Felsch <[email protected]>
>>> ---
>>> v2:
>>> - rephrase commit message
>>>
>>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/nxp,ptn5110.yaml | 4 +++-
>>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/nxp,ptn5110.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/nxp,ptn5110.yaml
>>> index eaedb4cc6b6c..7bd7bbbac9e0 100644
>>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/nxp,ptn5110.yaml
>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/nxp,ptn5110.yaml
>>> @@ -11,7 +11,9 @@ maintainers:
>>>
>>> properties:
>>> compatible:
>>> - const: nxp,ptn5110
>>> + enum:
>>> + - nxp,ptn5110
>>> + - tcpci
>>
>> That's not a fallback, but enum. Fallback is "items" and then you could
>
> Damn, you're right. Sorry.
>
>> also send a follow-up patchset (separate, so Greg won't take it) fixing
>> DTS (if not, let me know, so I will fix it).
>
> Sry. but I don't get this. Why do I need to send a follow-up? Greg did
> not apply anything, at least I didn't received an e-mail, that this
> patchset was picked.
If you change existing ptn5110 to a list of ptn5110+fallback, then all
existing will DTS start report warnings. Someone needs to fix this.
Best regards,
Krzysztof