RE: [EXT] Re: [PATCH v18 3/8] dt-bindings: i3c: Add NXP P3H2x4x i3c-hub support

[Lakshay Piplani]

Hi Krzysztof,

A gentle follow-up on my previous reply. Could you please confirm whether
my understanding is correct before I prepare the next revision.

Regards,
Lakshay


NXP Public
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Lakshay Piplani
> Sent: Wednesday, September 9, 2026 2:03 PM
> To: 'Krzysztof Kozlowski' <krzk@xxxxxxxxxx>; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> linux-i3c@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; alexandre.belloni@xxxxxxxxxxx;
> krzk+dt@xxxxxxxxxx; robh@xxxxxxxxxx; conor+dt@xxxxxxxxxx;
> devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; broonie@xxxxxxxxxx; lee@xxxxxxxxxx; Frank Li
> <frank.li@xxxxxxx>; lgirdwood@xxxxxxxxx
> Cc: Vikash Bansal <vikash.bansal@xxxxxxx>; Priyanka Jain
> <priyanka.jain@xxxxxxx>; Aman Kumar Pandey
> <aman.kumarpandey@xxxxxxx>
> Subject: RE: [EXT] Re: [PATCH v18 3/8] dt-bindings: i3c: Add NXP P3H2x4x i3c-
> hub support
>
> > >>> +
> > >>> +properties:
> > >>> +  compatible:
> > >>> +    enum:
> > >>> +      - nxp,p3h2440
> > >>> +      - nxp,p3h2441
> > >>> +      - nxp,p3h2840
> > >>> +      - nxp,p3h2841
> > >>
> > >> I don't see improvements.
> > >>
> > >
> > > For this one, could you let me know in a little bit more detail what
> > > you have
> > in mind?
> >
> > I questioned if devices are compatible. It seems the answer was that
> > yes. See writing bindings doc. There is plenty of examples showing how
> > to express compatibility, if they are compatible.
> >
>
> Thanks, understood.
>
> The variants share the same programming interface, so I'll express this through
> fallback compatibles with nxp,p3h2840 as the base compatible, e.g.
> compatible = "nxp,p3h2441", "nxp,p3h2840";
>
> This follows the fallback-compatible pattern used in other upstream bindings.
>
> Is this fine?
>
> properties:
>   compatible:
>     oneOf:
>       - const: nxp,p3h2840
>       - items:
>           - enum:
>               - nxp,p3h2440
>               - nxp,p3h2441
>               - nxp,p3h2841
>           - const: nxp,p3h2840
>
> Regards
> Lakshay

A gentle follow-up on my previous reply. Could you please confirm whether my understanding is correct before I prepare the next revision?

Regards,
Lakshay