Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] ASoC: dt-bindings: cs35l45: Adds SYNC properties
From: Ricardo Rivera-Matos
Date: Thu Aug 27 2026 - 16:07:51 EST
On 8/27/26 7:31 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
On 22/08/2026 00:41, Ricardo Rivera-Matos wrote:
Introduces support for the multidevice synchronization (SYNC)
bus. The properties introduced allow for the configuration
of the device's transmitter IDs.
Signed-off-by: Ricardo Rivera-Matos <rriveram@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
.../devicetree/bindings/sound/cirrus,cs35l45.yaml | 27 ++++++++++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 27 insertions(+)
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sound/cirrus,cs35l45.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sound/cirrus,cs35l45.yaml
index 70f6c62aedca..20d758dc442f 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sound/cirrus,cs35l45.yaml
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sound/cirrus,cs35l45.yaml
@@ -53,6 +53,29 @@ properties:
maximum: 3
default: 2
+ sync:
Same comment. You did not respond to Sashiko report because "it
contradicts itself" is pointless. It did not... unless you meant
irrelevant part about example. But that is just irrelevant to the binding.
I will explain the contradiction again. Pay close attention to the word bus.
Sashiko says "This commit introduces support for the multidevice synchronization (SYNC) bus".
Sashiko and I agree, it is a bus.
Sashiko then complains "Is it necessary to use a child node here just to group configuration properties? In Device Tree design, child nodes usually represent distinct hardware components, sub-devices, buses, or standardized structural elements rather than serving as logical folders to group related configuration properties."
I am confused, do buses merit a child node or not? This is a contradiction without additional context. Do certain kinds of buses get child nodes and others do not?
Sashiko is an automated review tool that is being ambiguous. I need a human maintainer decision made here. Does a bus merit a child node, yes or no?
Best regards,
Krzysztof
Ricardo