On 01/12/2025 09:18, Kumari Pallavi wrote: >>> Signed-off-by: Kumari Pallavi <[email protected]> >>> --- >>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/misc/qcom,fastrpc.yaml | 5 ++++- >>> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/misc/qcom,fastrpc.yaml >>> b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/misc/qcom,fastrpc.yaml >>> index 3f6199fc9ae6..6c19217d63a6 100644 >>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/misc/qcom,fastrpc.yaml >>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/misc/qcom,fastrpc.yaml >>> @@ -18,7 +18,10 @@ description: | >>> >>> properties: >>> compatible: >>> - const: qcom,fastrpc >>> + items: >> >> No need to introduce items, wasn't here before. Just enum directly. >> > > If I use enum directly, the schema will only validate a single > string—either "qcom,fastrpc" or "qcom,kaanapali-fastrpc". However, my > DTS changes introduce a compatible property with two strings: the
No, it does not. You still have one item and your claim of any difference is a proof you did not test it. > SoC-specific string followed by the generic fallback. > That’s why I used items in the schema—to allow an array of strings where > the first entry is "qcom,kaanapali-fastrpc" and the second is "qcom,fastrpc" Best regards, Krzysztof
