[Linux-stm32] [PATCH v2 1/2] dt-bindings: stm32: document MYD-YA15XC-T development board

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 01/09/2023 12:38, Alexander Shiyan wrote:
> Add new entry for MYD-YA15XC-T development board.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Alexander Shiyan <eagle.alexander923 at gmail.com>
> ---
>  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/stm32/stm32.yaml | 7 +++++++
>  1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/stm32/stm32.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/stm32/stm32.yaml
> index 4466b455bffa..1bde704bcd65 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/stm32/stm32.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/stm32/stm32.yaml
> @@ -140,6 +140,13 @@ properties:
>            - const: engicam,microgea-stm32mp1
>            - const: st,stm32mp157
>  
> +      - description: MyirTech STM32MP15x SoM based Boards
> +        items:
> +          - const: myir,myd-ya15xc-t   # MYIR MYD-YA15XC-T STM32MP151C
> +          - const: myir,myc-ya15xc-t   # MYIR MYC-YA15XC-T STM32MP15X SoM

I don't think you can have one compatible for all of them. The 153 and
157 variants differ by number of CANs, which are probably enabled in
your board DTS?

Also, I cannot find ordering of 153 and 157 variants:
https://www.myirtech.com/list.asp?id=658
so I wonder if they have actually same part numbers.


> +          - enum:
> +              - st,stm32mp151

This is highly unusual syntax - I think no other binding in Linux kernel
uses it. It is correct and I understand why you did it, just might
confuse others as we usually NAK it. I think less confusing would be to
have here const (with the price of duplicating this per variant).

Best regards,
Krzysztof