Re: [PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: altera: document Stratix 10 eMMC compatible

[Conor Dooley]

On Wed, Jan 21, 2026 at 08:39:47AM +0000, Ng, Tze Yee wrote:
> On 21/1/2026 3:46 am, Conor Dooley wrote:
> > [You don't often get email from conor@xxxxxxxxxx. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ]
> > 
> > [CAUTION: This email is from outside your organization. Unless you trust the sender, do not click on links or open attachments as it may be a fraudulent email attempting to steal your information and/or compromise your computer.]
> Hi Conor,
> 
> Just to confirm I understand correctly, would you like me to update both:
> 
> 1. The binding schema (altera.yaml) to split the Stratix 10 boards into 
> two patterns, with the eMMC variant having a fallback chain?
> 
>        - description: Stratix 10 boards
>          items:
>            - enum:
>                - altr,socfpga-stratix10-socdk
>                - altr,socfpga-stratix10-swvp
>            - const: altr,socfpga-stratix10
> 
>        - description: Stratix 10 SoCDK eMMC variant
>          items:
>            - const: altr,socfpga-stratix10-socdk-emmc
>            - const: altr,socfpga-stratix10-socdk
>            - const: altr,socfpga-stratix10
> 
> 2. The device tree (socfpga_stratix10_socdk_emmc.dts) to update the 
> compatible property
> 
> from:
> compatible = "altr,socfpga-stratix10-socdk-emmc", "altr,socfpga-stratix10";
> 
> to:
> compatible = "altr,socfpga-stratix10-socdk-emmc",
> "altr,socfpga-stratix10-socdk",
> "altr,socfpga-stratix10";
> 
> Please let me know if this is the expected approach, or if you had 
> something different in mind.

Yes, that's effectively what I had in mind.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature