[PATCH net-next v4 2/6] dt-bindings: net: Brcm ASP 2.0 Ethernet controller

[Conor Dooley]

Hey Justin,
On Tue, May 23, 2023 at 04:27:12PM -0700, Justin Chen wrote:
> On Tue, May 23, 2023 at 3:55 PM Conor Dooley <conor at kernel.org> wrote:
> > On Tue, May 23, 2023 at 02:53:43PM -0700, Justin Chen wrote:
> >
> > > +  compatible:
> > > +    enum:
> > > +      - brcm,asp-v2.0
> > > +      - brcm,bcm72165-asp
> > > +      - brcm,asp-v2.1
> > > +      - brcm,bcm74165-asp
> >
> > > +        compatible = "brcm,bcm72165-asp", "brcm,asp-v2.0";
> >
> > You can't do this, as Rob's bot has pointed out. Please test the
> > bindings :( You need one of these type of constructs:
> >
> > compatible:
> >   oneOf:
> >     - items:
> >         - const: brcm,bcm72165-asp
> >         - const: brcm,asp-v2.0
> >     - items:
> >         - const: brcm,bcm74165-asp
> >         - const: brcm,asp-v2.1
> >
> > Although, given either you or Florian said there are likely to be
> > multiple parts, going for an enum, rather than const for the brcm,bcm..
> > entry will prevent some churn. Up to you.
> >
> Urg so close. Thought it was a trivial change, so didn't bother
> retesting the binding. I think I have it right now...
> 
>   compatible:
>     oneOf:
>       - items:
>           - enum:
>               - brcm,bcm72165-asp
>               - brcm,bcm74165-asp
>           - enum:
>               - brcm,asp-v2.0
>               - brcm,asp-v2.1
> 
> Something like this look good?

I am still caffeine-less, but this implies that both of
"brcm,bcm72165-asp", "brcm,asp-v2.0"
_and_
"brcm,bcm72165-asp", "brcm,asp-v2.1"
are. I suspect that that is not the case, unless "brcm,asp-v2.0" is a
valid fallback for "brcm,asp-v2.1"?
The oneOf: also becomes redundant since you only have one items:.

> Will submit a v5 tomorrow.

BTW, when you do, could you use the address listed in MAINTAINERS rather
than the one you used for this version?

Cheers,
Conor.