[PATCH v3 3/6] dt-bindings: nvmem: mediatek: efuse: Reuse mt8186-efuse in mt8188

[AngeloGioacchino Del Regno]

Il 02/10/24 08:11, Krzysztof Kozlowski ha scritto:
> On Wed, Oct 02, 2024 at 10:21:35AM +0800, Pablo Sun wrote:
>> mt8188 has the same GPU speed binning efuse field just
>> like mt8186, which requires post-processing to convert to the
>> bit field format specified by OPP table.
>>
>> Add the binding for the compatible list:
>>    "mediatek,mt8188-efuse", "mediatek,mt8186-efuse"
>> so mt8188 uses the same conversion.
>>
>> Suggested-by: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <angelogioacchino.delregno at collabora.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Pablo Sun <pablo.sun at mediatek.com>
>> ---
>>   Documentation/devicetree/bindings/nvmem/mediatek,efuse.yaml | 4 ++++
>>   1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/nvmem/mediatek,efuse.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/nvmem/mediatek,efuse.yaml
>> index 32b8c1eb4e80..70815a3329bf 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/nvmem/mediatek,efuse.yaml
>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/nvmem/mediatek,efuse.yaml
>> @@ -39,6 +39,10 @@ properties:
>>                 - mediatek,mt8195-efuse
>>                 - mediatek,mt8516-efuse
>>             - const: mediatek,efuse
>> +      - items:
>> +          - enum:
>> +              - mediatek,mt8188-efuse
>> +          - const: mediatek,mt8186-efuse
> 
> And this is not compatible with generic one? This is confusing. Why are
> you adding generic fallbacks if they are not valid?
> 

It was my suggestion to start dropping the usage of the generic "mediatek,efuse"
fallback, as I've seen multiple times feedback saying to not use generic fallbacks.

Was that wrong?

Cheers,
Angelo