Hi Ezequiel,
Am 26.06.21 um 02:47 schrieb Ezequiel Garcia:
Hey Dafna,
Thanks a lot for reviewing this.
On Fri, 2021-06-25 at 12:21 +0300, Dafna Hirschfeld wrote:
Hi,
On 24.06.21 21:26, Ezequiel Garcia wrote:
From: Paul Kocialkowski<[email protected]>
The Rockchip PX30 SoC has a Hantro VPU that features a decoder (VDPU2)
and an encoder (VEPU2).
Signed-off-by: Paul Kocialkowski<[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Ezequiel Garcia<[email protected]>
---
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/rockchip-vpu.yaml | 3 +++
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/rockchip-vpu.yaml
b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/rockchip-vpu.yaml
index b88172a59de7..3b9c5aa91fcc 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/rockchip-vpu.yaml
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/rockchip-vpu.yaml
@@ -28,6 +28,9 @@ properties:
- items:
- const: rockchip,rk3228-vpu
- const: rockchip,rk3399-vpu
+ - items:
+ - const: rockchip,px30-vpu
+ - const: rockchip,rk3399-vpu
This rk3399 compatible is already mentioned in the last 'items' list, should we
add it again?
What we are mandating here is that "rockchip,px30-vpu" can only be used
with "rockchip,rk3399-vpu".
I.e.:
compatible = "rockchip,px30-vpu", "rockchip,rk3399-vpu";
So why not making the already existing to:
- items:
- enum:
- rockchip,px30-vpu
- rockchip,rk3228-vpu
- const: rockchip,rk3399-vpu
Alex
