Add the compatible for an 64Kb EEPROM from Belling.

Signed-off-by: Luca Weiss <luca@lucaweiss.eu>
---
 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/eeprom/at24.yaml | 1 +
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)

diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/eeprom/at24.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/eeprom/at24.yaml
index 0ac68646c077790c67c424d0f9157d6ec9b9e331..1e88861674ac8525335edec1b214675c8efa3ffe 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/eeprom/at24.yaml
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/eeprom/at24.yaml
@@ -131,6 +131,7 @@ properties:
           - const: atmel,24c32
       - items:
           - enum:
+              - belling,bl24s64
               - onnn,n24s64b
               - puya,p24c64f
           - const: atmel,24c64

-- 
2.50.1

On Sun, Aug 10, 2025 at 05:37:54PM +0200, Luca Weiss wrote:
> Add the compatible for an 64Kb EEPROM from Belling.

It is generally not required to add a compatible here assuming 
"atmel,24c64" is enough to identify the specific device (i.e. read the 
device's ID registers). If it is not sufficient, then some details here 
about why would be useful.

> 
> Signed-off-by: Luca Weiss <luca@lucaweiss.eu>
> ---
>  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/eeprom/at24.yaml | 1 +
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/eeprom/at24.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/eeprom/at24.yaml
> index 0ac68646c077790c67c424d0f9157d6ec9b9e331..1e88861674ac8525335edec1b214675c8efa3ffe 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/eeprom/at24.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/eeprom/at24.yaml
> @@ -131,6 +131,7 @@ properties:
>            - const: atmel,24c32
>        - items:
>            - enum:
> +              - belling,bl24s64
>                - onnn,n24s64b
>                - puya,p24c64f
>            - const: atmel,24c64
> 
> -- 
> 2.50.1
>

Hi Rob,

On 18-08-2025 5:51 p.m., Rob Herring wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 10, 2025 at 05:37:54PM +0200, Luca Weiss wrote:
>> Add the compatible for an 64Kb EEPROM from Belling.
> 
> It is generally not required to add a compatible here assuming
> "atmel,24c64" is enough to identify the specific device (i.e. read the
> device's ID registers). If it is not sufficient, then some details here
> about why would be useful.

I thought DT was meant to describe the hardware, and this specific 
EEPROM on the device is a Belling BL24S64, and it's software-compatible 
to this generic atmel compatible.
That's why we have compatible = "belling,bl24s64", "atmel,24c64";

Am I missing something, or misunderstanding how DT is meant to be written?

Regards
Luca

> 
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Luca Weiss <luca@lucaweiss.eu>
>> ---
>>   Documentation/devicetree/bindings/eeprom/at24.yaml | 1 +
>>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/eeprom/at24.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/eeprom/at24.yaml
>> index 0ac68646c077790c67c424d0f9157d6ec9b9e331..1e88861674ac8525335edec1b214675c8efa3ffe 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/eeprom/at24.yaml
>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/eeprom/at24.yaml
>> @@ -131,6 +131,7 @@ properties:
>>             - const: atmel,24c32
>>         - items:
>>             - enum:
>> +              - belling,bl24s64
>>                 - onnn,n24s64b
>>                 - puya,p24c64f
>>             - const: atmel,24c64
>>
>> -- 
>> 2.50.1
>>

On Mon, Aug 18, 2025 at 7:46 PM Luca Weiss <luca@lucaweiss.eu> wrote:
>
> Hi Rob,
>
> On 18-08-2025 5:51 p.m., Rob Herring wrote:
> > On Sun, Aug 10, 2025 at 05:37:54PM +0200, Luca Weiss wrote:
> >> Add the compatible for an 64Kb EEPROM from Belling.
> >
> > It is generally not required to add a compatible here assuming
> > "atmel,24c64" is enough to identify the specific device (i.e. read the
> > device's ID registers). If it is not sufficient, then some details here
> > about why would be useful.
>
> I thought DT was meant to describe the hardware, and this specific
> EEPROM on the device is a Belling BL24S64, and it's software-compatible
> to this generic atmel compatible.
> That's why we have compatible = "belling,bl24s64", "atmel,24c64";
>
> Am I missing something, or misunderstanding how DT is meant to be written?
>

Right, this is what we've been doing historically which is evident by
the number of compatibles we have in the schema that are never
mentioned in the driver C code.

Bartosz