[PATCH 2/3] dt-bindings: arm: Add SolidRun LX2162A SoM & Clearfog Board

[Josua Mayer]

HI Krzysztof,

Am 16.06.23 um 14:36 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski:
> On 16/06/2023 13:06, Josua Mayer wrote:
>> Add DT compatible for SolidRun LX2162A SoM and Clearfog board.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Josua Mayer <josua at solid-run.com>
>> ---
>>   Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/fsl.yaml | 2 ++
>>   1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/fsl.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/fsl.yaml
>> index 15d411084065..438a4ece8157 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/fsl.yaml
>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/fsl.yaml
>> @@ -1373,9 +1373,11 @@ properties:
>>         - description: SolidRun LX2160A based Boards
>>           items:
>>             - enum:
>> +              - solidrun,clearfog
>>                 - solidrun,clearfog-cx
>>                 - solidrun,honeycomb
>>             - const: solidrun,lx2160a-cex7
>> +          - const: solidrun,lx2162a-som
>>             - const: fsl,lx2160a
> You change existing entries, breaking boards and changing the meaning,
> without any explanation in commit msg. That's not how it is done. Please
> provide rationale in commit msg.

I'm sorry. Given your comment I think I did not understand how these 
entries are supposed to work.
So perhaps you can provide some guidance based on my explanation?:

- NXP LX2162 is a smaller physical package of the same LX2160 SoC, with 
reduced IOs and some silicon blocks disabled.
- SolidRun LX2162 SoM is essentially a different form factor of LX2160 CEX
- SolidRun LX2162 Clearfog is the reference platform for the SoM. 
Despite it's naming similarity to clearfog-cx, it has a different 
feature set more similar to SolidRun Armada 388 Clearfog Pro

So I believed I could just add to the existing entry "SolidRun LX2160A 
based Boards" also the new LX2162 Board & SoM.
I see now that adding a fourth const messes upthe existing 3-part 
compatible for those already existing boards.

Please can you confirm if it would have been more correct to replace 
"const: solidrun,lx2160a-cex7" with an enum?:
enum:
   - solidrun,lx2160a-cex7
   - solidrun,lx2162a-som

Finally, is it okay to add a "solidrun,clearfog" given my explanation 
above, or should it be more specific "solidrun,lx2162a-clearfog"?

> Best regards,
> Krzysztof
Sincerely
Josua Mayer