Re: [PATCH 2/3] dt-bindings: watchdog: realtek,otto-wdt: add compatible for RTL9607C

[Rustam Adilov]

Hello,
On 2026-05-09 18:13, Conor Dooley wrote:
> On Sat, May 09, 2026 at 09:31:00PM +0500, Rustam Adilov wrote:
>> Add the realtek,rtl9607-wdt compatible to the Realtek Otto watchdog
>> binding.
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Rustam Adilov <adilov@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>>  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/watchdog/realtek,otto-wdt.yaml | 1 +
>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>> 
>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/watchdog/realtek,otto-wdt.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/watchdog/realtek,otto-wdt.yaml
>> index 1f5390a67cdb..ac9db40b12dc 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/watchdog/realtek,otto-wdt.yaml
>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/watchdog/realtek,otto-wdt.yaml
>> @@ -30,6 +30,7 @@ properties:
>>        - realtek,rtl8390-wdt
>>        - realtek,rtl9300-wdt
>>        - realtek,rtl9310-wdt
>> +      - realtek,rtl9607-wdt
> 
> Please explain in your commit message why this new device is not
> compatible with the existing ones, particularly given the driver patch
> implies that it would be.
> pw-bot: changes-requested

Is the fact "RTL9607C is different SoC compared to the others in the list" not
enough of a reason to include even though the all of them have an identical watchdog
timer device? But yes, i can use any other compatible just as fine.

Maybe its just difference in maintainers because the RTL9310 [1] was accepted and
had the identical case to this one.

[1]- https://lore.kernel.org/linux-watchdog/84d873d7dd375cd2392f89fa6bd9e0fe5dda4e1c.1656356377.git.sander@xxxxxxxxxxxxx/

> 
> Thanks,
> Conor.

Best,
Rustam