Re: [PATCH v5 01/15] dt-bindings: usb: tps6598x: Add tps25750

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 17/09/2023 17:26, Abdel Alkuor wrote:
> From: Abdel Alkuor <abdelalkuor@xxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> TPS25750 is USB TypeC PD controller which is a subset of TPS6598x.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Abdel Alkuor <abdelalkuor@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  .../devicetree/bindings/usb/ti,tps6598x.yaml  | 70 +++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 70 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/ti,tps6598x.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/ti,tps6598x.yaml
> index 5497a60cddbc..e49bd92b5276 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/ti,tps6598x.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/ti,tps6598x.yaml
> @@ -20,6 +20,8 @@ properties:
>      enum:
>        - ti,tps6598x
>        - apple,cd321x
> +      - ti,tps25750
> +
>    reg:
>      maxItems: 1
>  
> @@ -32,10 +34,45 @@ properties:
>      items:
>        - const: irq
>  
> +  firmware-name:
> +    description: |
> +      Should contain the name of the default patch binary
> +      file located on the firmware search path which is
> +      used to switch the controller into APP mode.
> +      This is used when tps25750 doesn't have an EEPROM
> +      connected to it.
> +    maxItems: 1
> +
> +  ti,patch-address:
> +    description: |
> +      One of PBMs command data field is I2C slave address
> +      which is used when writing the patch for TPS25750.
> +      The slave address can be any value except 0x00, 0x20,
> +      0x21, 0x22, and 0x23

Why this cannot be another entry in the reg?

> +    $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/uint8
> +    minimum: 1
> +    maximum: 0x7e
> +
>  required:
>    - compatible
>    - reg
>  
> +allOf:
> +  - if:
> +      properties:
> +        compatible:
> +          contains:
> +            const: ti,tps25750
> +    then:
> +      required:
> +        - ti,patch-address
> +        - connector


Why? Connector should be required or not required for both devices. What
is different between them?


Best regards,
Krzysztof