[PATCH v4 1/6] dt-bindings: display: rockchip: analogix-dp: Add support for RK3568

[sashiko-bot at kernel.org]

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Low] dt-bindings: display: rockchip: unwieldy per-compatible conditionals
--

commit 53ce09e99c75e142a328f4bf2e7535fad7dadeb9
Author: Damon Ding <damon.ding at rock-chips.com>

dt-bindings: display: rockchip: analogix-dp: Add support for RK3568

This commit documents the rockchip,rk3568-edp compatible in
rockchip,analogix-dp.yaml, making rockchip,grf conditional and adding the
avdd-0v9-supply and avdd-1v8-supply properties for RK3568.

> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/rockchip/rockchip,analogix-dp.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/rockchip/rockchip,analogix-dp.yaml
> index 6548f157fd966..f3e70cc3a1236 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/rockchip/rockchip,analogix-dp.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/rockchip/rockchip,analogix-dp.yaml

[ ... ]

> @@ -61,11 +72,25 @@ required:
>    - clock-names
>    - resets
>    - reset-names
> -  - rockchip,grf
>  
>  allOf:
>    - $ref: /schemas/display/bridge/analogix,dp.yaml#
>  
> +  - if:
> +      properties:
> +        compatible:
> +          contains:
> +            const: rockchip,rk3568-edp
> +    then:
> +      properties:
> +        rockchip,grf: false
> +    else:
> +      properties:
> +        avdd-0v9-supply: false
> +        avdd-1v8-supply: false
> +      required:
> +        - rockchip,grf
> +
>    - if:
>        properties:
>          compatible:
> @@ -100,6 +125,7 @@ allOf:
>          compatible:
>            contains:
>              enum:
> +              - rockchip,rk3568-edp
>                - rockchip,rk3576-edp
>                - rockchip,rk3588-edp
>      then:

[Severity: Low]
This isn't a bug, but with the addition of rockchip,rk3568-edp, allOf in
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/rockchip/rockchip,analogix-dp.yaml
now has four separate per-compatible if-then blocks governing almost all
Rockchip-specific properties (clocks, clock-names, resets, reset-names,
rockchip,grf, avdd-0v9-supply, and avdd-1v8-supply), with
rockchip,rk3568-edp matched in two different blocks.

Given these growing variant differences across SoCs, would it be cleaner
to split this binding into separate schema documents rather than adding
more per-compatible conditionals here?

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20261030064905.2248999-1-damon.ding@rock-chips.com?part=1