Document the compatible string for Exynos7870's UART driver. The
devicetree property samsung,uart-fifosize must be mandatory, as the
driver enquires about the FIFO sizes. This feature makes it compatible
with Exynos8895's UART.

Signed-off-by: Kaustabh Chakraborty <kauschluss@disroot.org>
---
This patch series is a part of Exynos7870 upstreaming.
---
Changes in v2:
- Modify UART compatible to now fallback Exynos8895 UART.
- Remove the UART driver patch, no longer needed.
- Link to v1: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250204-exynos7870-uart-v1-0-06be6aa96284@disroot.org
---
 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/samsung_uart.yaml | 4 ++++
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)

diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/samsung_uart.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/samsung_uart.yaml
index 070eba9f19d3e039090c58a82f93d02eed58ab84..83d9986d8e98a2a55615d15383c9c7fc89f5b52f 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/samsung_uart.yaml
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/samsung_uart.yaml
@@ -42,6 +42,10 @@ properties:
               - samsung,exynosautov9-uart
               - samsung,exynosautov920-uart
           - const: samsung,exynos850-uart
+      - items:
+          - enum:
+              - samsung,exynos7870-uart
+          - const: samsung,exynos8895-uart
 
   reg:
     maxItems: 1

---
base-commit: e5d3fd687aac5eceb1721fa92b9f49afcf4c3717
change-id: 20250203-exynos7870-uart-62f64cea2489

Best regards,
-- 
Kaustabh Chakraborty <kauschluss@disroot.org>

On 17/03/2025 20:21, Kaustabh Chakraborty wrote:
> Document the compatible string for Exynos7870's UART driver. The
> devicetree property samsung,uart-fifosize must be mandatory, as the
> driver enquires about the FIFO sizes. This feature makes it compatible
> with Exynos8895's UART.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Kaustabh Chakraborty <kauschluss@disroot.org>
> ---
So you just ignored the tags and ask us to do the work twice? So all
reviews are wasted and we need to duplicate the effort?

My time on upstream is very limited, thus I find it very disrespectful.

<form letter>
It looks like you received a tag and forgot to add it.

If you do not know the process, here is a short explanation:
Please add Acked-by/Reviewed-by/Tested-by tags when posting new versions
of patchset, under or above your Signed-off-by tag, unless patch changed
significantly (e.g. new properties added to the DT bindings). Tag is
"received", when provided in a message replied to you on the mailing
list. Tools like b4 can help here. However, there's no need to repost
patches *only* to add the tags. The upstream maintainer will do that for
tags received on the version they apply.

Please read:
https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.12-rc3/source/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst#L577

If a tag was not added on purpose, please state why and what changed.
</form letter>