On Mon, Mar 28, 2016 at 12:02 PM, Matthew McClintock <mmccl...@codeaurora.org> wrote: > On Mar 25, 2016, at 9:15 AM, Rob Herring <r...@kernel.org> wrote: >> >> On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 05:05:04PM -0500, Matthew McClintock wrote: >>> Update the compatible string to add new device tree binding >>> >>> CC: linux-watch...@vger.kernel.org >>> Signed-off-by: Matthew McClintock <mmccl...@codeaurora.org> >>> --- >>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/watchdog/qcom-wdt.txt | 1 + >>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) >>> >>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/watchdog/qcom-wdt.txt >>> b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/watchdog/qcom-wdt.txt >>> index 60bb2f98..45b37cf 100644 >>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/watchdog/qcom-wdt.txt >>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/watchdog/qcom-wdt.txt >>> @@ -6,6 +6,7 @@ Required properties : >>> >>> "qcom,kpss-timer" >>> "qcom,scss-timer" >>> + "qcom,kpss-standalone" >> >> What SoC(s) is this in. Use SoC specific compatible strings please. > > So ipq4019 wins the race because we are the first to try to enable watchdog > for this block?
Yep, that's how it is supposed to work. Newer chips claim compatibility with older ones. > qcom,kpss-ipq4019 ? Yes, but generally <vendor>,<soc>-<block> is preferred order. Rob
