[PATCH v2 2/4] dt-bindings: soc: bcm: Add bcm2712 compatible
Stanimir Varbanov
svarbanov at suse.de
Fri Oct 31 11:22:00 PDT 2025
Hi Conor,
On 10/31/25 5:04 PM, Conor Dooley wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 31, 2025 at 12:24:21PM +0200, Stanimir Varbanov wrote:
>> Add bcm2712-pm compatible and update the bindings to satisfy it's
>> requirements. The PM hardware block inside bcm2712 lacks the "asb"
>> and "rpivid_asb" register ranges and also does not have clocks, update
>> the bindings accordingly.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Stanimir Varbanov <svarbanov at suse.de>
>> Reviewed-by: Florian Fainelli <florian.fainelli at broadcom.com>
>> ---
>> .../bindings/soc/bcm/brcm,bcm2835-pm.yaml | 38 ++++++++++++++++---
>> 1 file changed, 32 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/bcm/brcm,bcm2835-pm.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/bcm/brcm,bcm2835-pm.yaml
>> index e28ef198a801..ce910802ee9d 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/bcm/brcm,bcm2835-pm.yaml
>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/bcm/brcm,bcm2835-pm.yaml
>> @@ -13,23 +13,21 @@ description: |
>> maintainers:
>> - Nicolas Saenz Julienne <nsaenz at kernel.org>
>>
>> -allOf:
>> - - $ref: /schemas/watchdog/watchdog.yaml#
>> -
>> properties:
>> compatible:
>> items:
>> - enum:
>> - brcm,bcm2835-pm
>> - brcm,bcm2711-pm
>> + - brcm,bcm2712-pm
>> - const: brcm,bcm2835-pm-wdt
>>
>> reg:
>> - minItems: 2
>> + minItems: 1
>> maxItems: 3
>>
>> reg-names:
>> - minItems: 2
>> + minItems: 1
>> items:
>> - const: pm
>> - const: asb
>> @@ -62,7 +60,35 @@ required:
>> - reg
>> - "#power-domain-cells"
>> - "#reset-cells"
>> - - clocks
>> +
>> +allOf:
>> + - $ref: /schemas/watchdog/watchdog.yaml#
>> +
>> + - if:
>> + properties:
>> + compatible:
>> + contains:
>> + enum:
>> + - brcm,bcm2835-pm
>> + - brcm,bcm2711-pm
>> + then:
>> + required:
>> + - clocks
>> +
>> + properties:
>> + reg:
>> + minItems: 2
>> +
>> + reg-names:
>> + minItems: 2
>
>> +
>> + else:
>> + properties:
>> + reg:
>> + minItems: 1
>> +
>> + reg-names:
>> + minItems: 1
>
> This else has no impact, was it meant to be maxItems?
Oops, yes it should be maxItems. Sending new version ...
~Stan
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list