The J722S CPSW3G is mostly identical to the AM64's, but additionally
supports SGMII.

Signed-off-by: Nora Schiffer <nora.schiffer@ew.tq-group.com>
---
 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/ti,k3-am654-cpsw-nuss.yaml | 1 +
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)

diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/ti,k3-am654-cpsw-nuss.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/ti,k3-am654-cpsw-nuss.yaml
index a959c1d7e643a..9ab8237c7f79e 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/ti,k3-am654-cpsw-nuss.yaml
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/ti,k3-am654-cpsw-nuss.yaml
@@ -59,6 +59,7 @@ properties:
       - ti,j7200-cpswxg-nuss
       - ti,j721e-cpsw-nuss
       - ti,j721e-cpswxg-nuss
+      - ti,j722s-cpsw-nuss
       - ti,j784s4-cpswxg-nuss
 
   reg:
-- 
TQ-Systems GmbH | Mühlstraße 2, Gut Delling | 82229 Seefeld, Germany
Amtsgericht München, HRB 105018
Geschäftsführer: Detlef Schneider, Rüdiger Stahl, Stefan Schneider
https://www.tq-group.com/

On Wed, Mar 18, 2026 at 03:05:25PM +0100, Nora Schiffer wrote:
> The J722S CPSW3G is mostly identical to the AM64's, but additionally
> supports SGMII.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Nora Schiffer <nora.schiffer@ew.tq-group.com>
> ---
>  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/ti,k3-am654-cpsw-nuss.yaml | 1 +
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/ti,k3-am654-cpsw-nuss.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/ti,k3-am654-cpsw-nuss.yaml
> index a959c1d7e643a..9ab8237c7f79e 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/ti,k3-am654-cpsw-nuss.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/ti,k3-am654-cpsw-nuss.yaml
> @@ -59,6 +59,7 @@ properties:
>        - ti,j7200-cpswxg-nuss
>        - ti,j721e-cpsw-nuss
>        - ti,j721e-cpswxg-nuss
> +      - ti,j722s-cpsw-nuss

For all these bindings, why is a fallback not suitable? Seems like it'd
be possible here, since there's just a new feature. Is there some other
programming model difference?

>        - ti,j784s4-cpswxg-nuss
>  
>    reg:
> -- 
> TQ-Systems GmbH | Mühlstraße 2, Gut Delling | 82229 Seefeld, Germany
> Amtsgericht München, HRB 105018
> Geschäftsführer: Detlef Schneider, Rüdiger Stahl, Stefan Schneider
> https://www.tq-group.com/
> 

On Wed, 2026-03-18 at 17:35 +0000, Conor Dooley wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 18, 2026 at 03:05:25PM +0100, Nora Schiffer wrote:
> > The J722S CPSW3G is mostly identical to the AM64's, but additionally
> > supports SGMII.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Nora Schiffer <nora.schiffer@ew.tq-group.com>
> > ---
> >  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/ti,k3-am654-cpsw-nuss.yaml | 1 +
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> > 
> > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/ti,k3-am654-cpsw-nuss.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/ti,k3-am654-cpsw-nuss.yaml
> > index a959c1d7e643a..9ab8237c7f79e 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/ti,k3-am654-cpsw-nuss.yaml
> > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/ti,k3-am654-cpsw-nuss.yaml
> > @@ -59,6 +59,7 @@ properties:
> >        - ti,j7200-cpswxg-nuss
> >        - ti,j721e-cpsw-nuss
> >        - ti,j721e-cpswxg-nuss
> > +      - ti,j722s-cpsw-nuss
> 
> For all these bindings, why is a fallback not suitable? Seems like it'd
> be possible here, since there's just a new feature. Is there some other
> programming model difference?

I think a fallback makes sense, I didn't add one because other variants derived
from the AM64 don't have one either. I can include a fallback in v2 (for all 3
bindings in this series).

Best,
Nora



> 
> >        - ti,j784s4-cpswxg-nuss
> >  
> >    reg:
> > -- 
> > TQ-Systems GmbH | Mühlstraße 2, Gut Delling | 82229 Seefeld, Germany
> > Amtsgericht München, HRB 105018
> > Geschäftsführer: Detlef Schneider, Rüdiger Stahl, Stefan Schneider
> > https://www.tq-group.com/
> > 

-- 
TQ-Systems GmbH | Mühlstraße 2, Gut Delling | 82229 Seefeld, Germany
Amtsgericht München, HRB 105018
Geschäftsführer: Detlef Schneider, Rüdiger Stahl, Stefan Schneider
https://www.tq-group.com/

On Thu, Mar 19, 2026 at 09:55:24AM +0100, Nora Schiffer wrote:
> On Wed, 2026-03-18 at 17:35 +0000, Conor Dooley wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 18, 2026 at 03:05:25PM +0100, Nora Schiffer wrote:
> > > The J722S CPSW3G is mostly identical to the AM64's, but additionally
> > > supports SGMII.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Nora Schiffer <nora.schiffer@ew.tq-group.com>
> > > ---
> > >  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/ti,k3-am654-cpsw-nuss.yaml | 1 +
> > >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/ti,k3-am654-cpsw-nuss.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/ti,k3-am654-cpsw-nuss.yaml
> > > index a959c1d7e643a..9ab8237c7f79e 100644
> > > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/ti,k3-am654-cpsw-nuss.yaml
> > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/ti,k3-am654-cpsw-nuss.yaml
> > > @@ -59,6 +59,7 @@ properties:
> > >        - ti,j7200-cpswxg-nuss
> > >        - ti,j721e-cpsw-nuss
> > >        - ti,j721e-cpswxg-nuss
> > > +      - ti,j722s-cpsw-nuss
> > 
> > For all these bindings, why is a fallback not suitable? Seems like it'd
> > be possible here, since there's just a new feature. Is there some other
> > programming model difference?
> 
> I think a fallback makes sense, I didn't add one because other variants derived
> from the AM64 don't have one either. I can include a fallback in v2 (for all 3
> bindings in this series).

Unless someones got a good reason not to, I think you should do so.