[PATCH v4 1/4] dt-bindings: mediatek: watchdog: Fix compatible fallbacks and example

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 10/08/2022 15:58, Allen-KH Cheng wrote:
> I agree the advantage of patch is aesthetic. Since I also want to send
> another "watchdog: Convert binding to YAML" PATCH, it's better let all
> wdt compatibles in the binding match the contents of mtk_wdt_dt_ids in
> drivers/watchdog/mtk_wdt.c
> 
> static const struct of_device_id mtk_wdt_dt_ids[] = {
> 	{ .compatible = "mediatek,mt2712-wdt", .data = &mt2712_data },
> 	{ .compatible = "mediatek,mt6589-wdt" },
> 	{ .compatible = "mediatek,mt7986-wdt", .data = &mt7986_data },
> 	{ .compatible = "mediatek,mt8183-wdt", .data = &mt8183_data },
> 	{ .compatible = "mediatek,mt8186-wdt", .data = &mt8186_data },
> 	{ .compatible = "mediatek,mt8192-wdt", .data = &mt8192_data },
> 	{ .compatible = "mediatek,mt8195-wdt", .data = &mt8195_data },
> 	{ /* sentinel */ }
> };
> 
> We have "mediatek,mt8186-wdt" "mediatek,mt8195-wdt" and
> "mediatek,mt7986-wdt" now and they have their DT data for the reset
> control.
> 
> It's weird and unuseful to add "mediatek,mt6589-wdt" as fallback. 
> 
> 
> Please kindly let me know if I missed anything

How the driver arranges it should not be a reason to use or not to use
specific fallback. Although Rob acked it, but I still think you did not
provide valid reason for the change.

Valid reason is usually the actual hardware (so they are actually not
compatible with mt6589), not exactly how once someone did it in the driver.

Best regards,
Krzysztof