| Message ID | 20240723092310.3565410-26-Delphine_CC_Chiu@wiwynn.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | Add i2c-mux and eeprom devices for Meta Yosemite 4 | expand |
On Tue, Jul 23, 2024 at 05:23:06PM +0800, Delphine CC Chiu wrote: > Add RTQ6056 (spider board 3rd source) support in yosemite4 DTS. > > Signed-off-by: Delphine CC Chiu <Delphine_CC_Chiu@wiwynn.com> > --- > .../boot/dts/aspeed/aspeed-bmc-facebook-yosemite4.dts | 10 +++++----- > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/aspeed/aspeed-bmc-facebook-yosemite4.dts b/arch/arm/boot/dts/aspeed/aspeed-bmc-facebook-yosemite4.dts > index f73719b3c2f1..03a1e41312e3 100644 > --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/aspeed/aspeed-bmc-facebook-yosemite4.dts > +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/aspeed/aspeed-bmc-facebook-yosemite4.dts > @@ -1240,35 +1240,35 @@ adc@37 { > }; > > power-sensor@40 { > - compatible = "ti,ina233"; > + compatible = "ti,ina233", "richtek,rtq6056"; Is this legal to have two chips both listed as compatible? I thought this approach has been rejected before. > reg = <0x40>; > resistor-calibration = /bits/ 16 <0x0a00>; > current-lsb= /bits/ 16 <0x0001>; > }; > > power-sensor@41 { > - compatible = "ti,ina233"; > + compatible = "ti,ina233", "richtek,rtq6056"; > reg = <0x41>; > resistor-calibration = /bits/ 16 <0x0a00>; > current-lsb= /bits/ 16 <0x0001>; > }; > > power-sensor@42 { > - compatible = "ti,ina233"; > + compatible = "ti,ina233", "richtek,rtq6056"; > reg = <0x42>; > resistor-calibration = /bits/ 16 <0x0a00>; > current-lsb= /bits/ 16 <0x0001>; > }; > > power-sensor@43 { > - compatible = "ti,ina233"; > + compatible = "ti,ina233", "richtek,rtq6056"; > reg = <0x43>; > resistor-calibration = /bits/ 16 <0x0a00>; > current-lsb= /bits/ 16 <0x0001>; > }; > > power-sensor@44 { > - compatible = "ti,ina233"; > + compatible = "ti,ina233", "richtek,rtq6056"; > reg = <0x44>; > resistor-calibration = /bits/ 16 <0x0a00>; > current-lsb= /bits/ 16 <0x0001>; > -- > 2.25.1 >
On Mon, 2024-07-29 at 17:03 -0500, Patrick Williams wrote: > On Tue, Jul 23, 2024 at 05:23:06PM +0800, Delphine CC Chiu wrote: > > Add RTQ6056 (spider board 3rd source) support in yosemite4 DTS. > > > > Signed-off-by: Delphine CC Chiu <Delphine_CC_Chiu@wiwynn.com> > > --- > > .../boot/dts/aspeed/aspeed-bmc-facebook-yosemite4.dts | 10 +++++----- > > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/aspeed/aspeed-bmc-facebook-yosemite4.dts b/arch/arm/boot/dts/aspeed/aspeed-bmc-facebook-yosemite4.dts > > index f73719b3c2f1..03a1e41312e3 100644 > > --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/aspeed/aspeed-bmc-facebook-yosemite4.dts > > +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/aspeed/aspeed-bmc-facebook-yosemite4.dts > > @@ -1240,35 +1240,35 @@ adc@37 { > > }; > > > > power-sensor@40 { > > - compatible = "ti,ina233"; > > + compatible = "ti,ina233", "richtek,rtq6056"; > > Is this legal to have two chips both listed as compatible? I thought > this approach has been rejected before. It depends on the circumstances. Does one have a superset of the functionality of the other? https://github.com/devicetree-org/devicetree-specification/blob/main/source/chapter2-devicetree-basics.rst#compatible Andrew
On 30/07/2024 00:03, Patrick Williams wrote: > On Tue, Jul 23, 2024 at 05:23:06PM +0800, Delphine CC Chiu wrote: >> Add RTQ6056 (spider board 3rd source) support in yosemite4 DTS. >> >> Signed-off-by: Delphine CC Chiu <Delphine_CC_Chiu@wiwynn.com> >> --- >> .../boot/dts/aspeed/aspeed-bmc-facebook-yosemite4.dts | 10 +++++----- >> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/aspeed/aspeed-bmc-facebook-yosemite4.dts b/arch/arm/boot/dts/aspeed/aspeed-bmc-facebook-yosemite4.dts >> index f73719b3c2f1..03a1e41312e3 100644 >> --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/aspeed/aspeed-bmc-facebook-yosemite4.dts >> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/aspeed/aspeed-bmc-facebook-yosemite4.dts >> @@ -1240,35 +1240,35 @@ adc@37 { >> }; >> >> power-sensor@40 { >> - compatible = "ti,ina233"; >> + compatible = "ti,ina233", "richtek,rtq6056"; > > Is this legal to have two chips both listed as compatible? I thought > this approach has been rejected before. > Testing would tell... This was clearly not tested and is just ridiculous. It does not look like you tested the DTS against bindings. Please run `make dtbs_check W=1` (see Documentation/devicetree/bindings/writing-schema.rst or https://www.linaro.org/blog/tips-and-tricks-for-validating-devicetree-sources-with-the-devicetree-schema/ for instructions). Best regards, Krzysztof
diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/aspeed/aspeed-bmc-facebook-yosemite4.dts b/arch/arm/boot/dts/aspeed/aspeed-bmc-facebook-yosemite4.dts index f73719b3c2f1..03a1e41312e3 100644 --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/aspeed/aspeed-bmc-facebook-yosemite4.dts +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/aspeed/aspeed-bmc-facebook-yosemite4.dts @@ -1240,35 +1240,35 @@ adc@37 { }; power-sensor@40 { - compatible = "ti,ina233"; + compatible = "ti,ina233", "richtek,rtq6056"; reg = <0x40>; resistor-calibration = /bits/ 16 <0x0a00>; current-lsb= /bits/ 16 <0x0001>; }; power-sensor@41 { - compatible = "ti,ina233"; + compatible = "ti,ina233", "richtek,rtq6056"; reg = <0x41>; resistor-calibration = /bits/ 16 <0x0a00>; current-lsb= /bits/ 16 <0x0001>; }; power-sensor@42 { - compatible = "ti,ina233"; + compatible = "ti,ina233", "richtek,rtq6056"; reg = <0x42>; resistor-calibration = /bits/ 16 <0x0a00>; current-lsb= /bits/ 16 <0x0001>; }; power-sensor@43 { - compatible = "ti,ina233"; + compatible = "ti,ina233", "richtek,rtq6056"; reg = <0x43>; resistor-calibration = /bits/ 16 <0x0a00>; current-lsb= /bits/ 16 <0x0001>; }; power-sensor@44 { - compatible = "ti,ina233"; + compatible = "ti,ina233", "richtek,rtq6056"; reg = <0x44>; resistor-calibration = /bits/ 16 <0x0a00>; current-lsb= /bits/ 16 <0x0001>;
Add RTQ6056 (spider board 3rd source) support in yosemite4 DTS. Signed-off-by: Delphine CC Chiu <Delphine_CC_Chiu@wiwynn.com> --- .../boot/dts/aspeed/aspeed-bmc-facebook-yosemite4.dts | 10 +++++----- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)