[PATCH v6 1/7] dt-bindings: phy: qcom,x1e80100-csi2-phy: Add SM8750 CSI2 PHY

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On Tue, Jul 21, 2026 at 05:46:00AM -0700, Hangxiang Ma wrote:
> The SM8750 camera subsystem exposes six CSI2 D-PHY blocks that follow the
> same programming model as Kaanapali. Describe the SM8750 CSI2 PHY using a

No, SM8750 does not have the same programming model as Kaanapali. When
SM8750 was created, there was no Kaanapali, so how it could have the
same interface?

> "qcom,sm8750-csi2-phy" compatible with the "qcom,kaanapali-csi2-phy"
> fallback, so the CAMSS binding can instantiate the CSIPHY nodes as
> separate phy devices.

Redundant sentence.

> 
> Signed-off-by: Hangxiang Ma <hangxiang.ma at oss.qualcomm.com>
> ---
>  .../devicetree/bindings/phy/qcom,x1e80100-csi2-phy.yaml        | 10 +++++++---
>  1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/qcom,x1e80100-csi2-phy.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/qcom,x1e80100-csi2-phy.yaml
> index 7943049834f9..95375efb2597 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/qcom,x1e80100-csi2-phy.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/qcom,x1e80100-csi2-phy.yaml

I just commented on very similar patch. This is confusing, there is no
such file and I do not get why you keep adding some long chain of
patches touching the same lines. Squash patches.

This is untestable.

> @@ -16,9 +16,13 @@ description:
>  
>  properties:
>    compatible:
> -    enum:
> -      - qcom,kaanapali-csi2-phy
> -      - qcom,x1e80100-csi2-phy
> +    oneOf:
> +      - enum:
> +          - qcom,kaanapali-csi2-phy
> +          - qcom,x1e80100-csi2-phy
> +      - items:
> +          - const: qcom,sm8750-csi2-phy
> +          - const: qcom,kaanapali-csi2-phy

SM8750 came one year before Kaanapali, so how such compatibility is possible?

Best regards,
Krzysztof