Date:   Mon, 13 Dec 2021 16:51:05 -0600
From:   Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>
To:     Heiko =?iso-8859-1?Q?St=FCbner?= <heiko@sntech.de>
Cc:     Sandy Huang <hjc@rock-chips.com>, David Airlie <airlied@linux.ie>,
        Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>, - <opensource@rock-chips.com>,
        David Heidelberg <david@ixit.cz>,
        ~okias/devicetree@lists.sr.ht, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
        devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
        linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: convert power domain node for rockchip DW
 MIPI DSI
Message-ID: <YbfOWXZJAZDuEU1V@robh.at.kernel.org>
References: <20211206212651.126405-1-david@ixit.cz>
 <26502781.jAYDHVeSjN@diego>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <26502781.jAYDHVeSjN@diego>
Precedence: bulk

On Sat, Dec 11, 2021 at 11:55:58AM +0100, Heiko St?bner wrote:
> Hi David,
> 
> Am Montag, 6. Dezember 2021, 22:26:50 CET schrieb David Heidelberg:
> > Convert into YAML format into format, which can be validated.
> > 
> > Changes:
> >  - drop panel from example
> 
> the patch subject is strange, talking about a "power domain node".
> That needs a fix.
> 
> Some more things below.
> 
> 
> > +properties:
> > +  compatible:
> > +    oneOf:
> > +      - items:
> > +          - enum:
> > +              - rockchip,px30-mipi-dsi
> > +              - rockchip,rk3288-mipi-dsi
> > +              - rockchip,rk3399-mipi-dsi
> > +          - const: snps,dw-mipi-dsi
> 
> > +      - items:
> > +          - const: rockchip,px30-mipi-dsi
> > +      - items:
> > +          - const: rockchip,rk3288-mipi-dsi
> > +      - items:
> > +          - const: rockchip,rk3399-mipi-dsi
> 
> what are these for?
> 
> I see that px30 uses the dsi without the snps part, but you
> can also just add a patch adding that second compatible to px30.dtsi

Or drop snps,dw-mipi-dsi as it doesn't seem to be all that meaningful. 
But I guess that's more invasive so maybe stick with changing px30.

> 
> I don't think we need to support both ways.

Agreed.

Rob