[PATCH v2 1/2] mmc: dt-bindings: sdhci-of-aspeed: Add AST2700 fallback compatibles

Ryan Chen posted 2 patches 2 weeks, 6 days ago
There is a newer version of this series
[PATCH v2 1/2] mmc: dt-bindings: sdhci-of-aspeed: Add AST2700 fallback compatibles
Posted by Ryan Chen 2 weeks, 6 days ago
Describe AST2700 as compatible with the existing AST2600 SD controller
and SDHCI bindings by requiring fallback compatibles in the device tree.

Also require `resets` on the AST2700 SD controller node.

Signed-off-by: Ryan Chen <ryan_chen@aspeedtech.com>
---
Changes in v2:
- add missing blank line
- modify ast2700 compatible items const
---
 .../devicetree/bindings/mmc/aspeed,sdhci.yaml      | 39 +++++++++++++++++-----
 1 file changed, 31 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mmc/aspeed,sdhci.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mmc/aspeed,sdhci.yaml
index d24950ccea95..9c8e068964a1 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mmc/aspeed,sdhci.yaml
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mmc/aspeed,sdhci.yaml
@@ -22,10 +22,14 @@ description: |+
 
 properties:
   compatible:
-    enum:
-      - aspeed,ast2400-sd-controller
-      - aspeed,ast2500-sd-controller
-      - aspeed,ast2600-sd-controller
+    oneOf:
+      - const: aspeed,ast2400-sd-controller
+      - const: aspeed,ast2500-sd-controller
+      - const: aspeed,ast2600-sd-controller
+      - items:
+          - const: aspeed,ast2700-sd-controller
+          - const: aspeed,ast2600-sd-controller
+
   reg:
     maxItems: 1
     description: Common configuration registers
@@ -38,6 +42,21 @@ properties:
     maxItems: 1
     description: The SD/SDIO controller clock gate
 
+  resets:
+    maxItems: 1
+
+if:
+  properties:
+    compatible:
+      contains:
+        const: aspeed,ast2700-sd-controller
+then:
+  required:
+    - resets
+else:
+  properties:
+    resets: false
+
 patternProperties:
   "^sdhci@[0-9a-f]+$":
     type: object
@@ -46,10 +65,14 @@ patternProperties:
 
     properties:
       compatible:
-        enum:
-          - aspeed,ast2400-sdhci
-          - aspeed,ast2500-sdhci
-          - aspeed,ast2600-sdhci
+        oneOf:
+          - const: aspeed,ast2400-sdhci
+          - const: aspeed,ast2500-sdhci
+          - const: aspeed,ast2600-sdhci
+          - items:
+              - const: aspeed,ast2700-sdhci
+              - const: aspeed,ast2600-sdhci
+
       reg:
         maxItems: 1
         description: The SDHCI registers

-- 
2.34.1
Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] mmc: dt-bindings: sdhci-of-aspeed: Add AST2700 fallback compatibles
Posted by Krzysztof Kozlowski 2 weeks, 5 days ago
On Tue, Mar 17, 2026 at 01:56:42PM +0800, Ryan Chen wrote:
> Describe AST2700 as compatible with the existing AST2600 SD controller
> and SDHCI bindings by requiring fallback compatibles in the device tree.
> 
> Also require `resets` on the AST2700 SD controller node.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Ryan Chen <ryan_chen@aspeedtech.com>
> ---
> Changes in v2:
> - add missing blank line
> - modify ast2700 compatible items const

Why?

> ---
>  .../devicetree/bindings/mmc/aspeed,sdhci.yaml      | 39 +++++++++++++++++-----
>  1 file changed, 31 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mmc/aspeed,sdhci.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mmc/aspeed,sdhci.yaml
> index d24950ccea95..9c8e068964a1 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mmc/aspeed,sdhci.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mmc/aspeed,sdhci.yaml
> @@ -22,10 +22,14 @@ description: |+
>  
>  properties:
>    compatible:
> -    enum:
> -      - aspeed,ast2400-sd-controller
> -      - aspeed,ast2500-sd-controller
> -      - aspeed,ast2600-sd-controller
> +    oneOf:
> +      - const: aspeed,ast2400-sd-controller
> +      - const: aspeed,ast2500-sd-controller
> +      - const: aspeed,ast2600-sd-controller

No, previous code was correct.

Is this some microslop LLM product? I questioned style last time and now
we got random changes without explanation.

Please confirm - did you use any LLM microslop tools to create this
patch? Please also confirm - who internally reviewed this patch before
posting?

Best regards,
Krzysztof