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

[Padmashree S S]

Thank you for the review. I will add the reg description and squash the patch!

On Wed, Apr 15, 2026 at 12:46 AM Kirill Marinushkin
<k.marinushkin@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> 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.