Re: [PATCH v4] ASoC: dt-bindings: ti,pcm3060: add descriptions and rename binding

[Kirill Marinushkin]

Hello Padmashree,


Allow me to once more propose this description, which

was in the original .txt, and you included into the patch v1, but 
removed for v3:


> + reg:

> + maxItems: 1

> + description: The I2C address of the device or SPI chip select number.


You also probably would like to squash patch v4 with the previous patch v3


Best regards,

Kirill


On 4/14/26 3:22 PM, Padmashree S S wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 14, 2026 at 12:09 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 14, 2026 at 09:18:54AM +0530, Padmashree S S wrote:
> > > Add description to reg property and overall binding mentioning that this
> > > driver supports both I2C and SPI. Rename binding to match compatible
> > > naming convention.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Padmashree S S <padmashreess2006@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > > Changes in v4:
> > >    - Rename binding from pcm3060 to ti,pcm3060
> > >    - Add binding description
> > >    - Add description to 'reg' property
> > >    - Remove unused label in example
> > >
> > > Changes in v3:
> > >    - Remove description from 'reg' property
> > > ---
> > >   .../bindings/sound/{pcm3060.yaml => ti,pcm3060.yaml}   | 10 +++++-----
> > What v4 is that of? There is no such file.
> >
> > Do not attach (thread) your patchsets to some other threads (unrelated
> > or older versions). This buries them deep in the mailbox and might
> > interfere with applying entire sets. See also:
> > https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.16-rc2/source/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst#L830
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Krzysztof
> Thanks for pointing this out.
>
> Since this is a DT binding patch for the same pcm3060 device, I linked
> it to the previous version. However, I realize the subject changed
> significantly, which made the threading confusing.
>
> I’m planning to resend it as a new patch in a separate thread. Please
> let me know if that works.