Re: [PATCH 2/2] Revert "dt-bindings: power: rpmpd: Add SM4250 support"

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 13/01/2023 17:36, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
> 
> 
> On 13.01.2023 17:33, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 13/01/2023 16:22, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
>>> SM4250 and SM6115 use a shared device tree and the RPMPDs are
>>> identical. There's no need for a separate entry, so remove it.
>>>
>>> This reverts commit 45ac44ed10e58cf9b510e6552317ed7d2602346f.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>> ---
>>>  .../devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.yaml          |  1 -
>>>  include/dt-bindings/power/qcom-rpmpd.h                 | 10 ----------
>>>  2 files changed, 11 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.yaml
>>> index 633d49884019..5bb9f59d196f 100644
>>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.yaml
>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.yaml
>>> @@ -39,7 +39,6 @@ properties:
>>>        - qcom,sdm845-rpmhpd
>>>        - qcom,sdx55-rpmhpd
>>>        - qcom,sdx65-rpmhpd
>>> -      - qcom,sm4250-rpmpd
>>
>> Yet, dedicated compatibles are usually recommended. Maybe this should be
>> used with fallback:
>> "qcom,sm4250-rpmpd", "qcom,sm6115-rpmpd"
> The compatible has never been used so far and it's really the
> same situation as SDM630/660 AFAIK, so I don't think it makes
> much sense.

OK, assuming these are almost the same SoCs in that aspect:

Acked-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx>

Best regards,
Krzysztof