From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-106112.protonmail.ch (mail-106112.protonmail.ch [79.135.106.112]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 42E692EC083; Mon, 17 Aug 2026 11:57:42 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=79.135.106.112 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1786967865; cv=none; b=kZZ9XGRvO5CwY+eQq6zBgYmhtQX8xSj3QFr3dkeeDz2NmPo95ahaMGGEE1oaA56TKUqw8SANO9mcvRxsk2yxgjxjXJC7IKdc0WRkTQBHviT6B2NgI65kTlH5UHGPrNOCVqIeigmdBPOExNWxsC0gUBsfcHdRKABnY6Q7PDYfUVM= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1786967865; c=relaxed/simple; bh=Ek6p3nHWJzIWB6mcb067TcsBbgSfwEaFoEFVAre8DAs=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=KBrw2+c+e+D8X9CfPqRS7fSrhwzJFDedmGuuBKp+BrvH8aZDCwyHHr7rHHTi0UPfFA1mFwQqR40KxVpWUPCqmJtJklUCE3hTWODfuhiAqVF66WzhB27oc0BOHpWb8o/+MLO2GNVmv2gegAzkVFml7VuBvOvnJBZSeskbOKxw6Ok= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=geanix.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=geanix.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=geanix.com header.i=@geanix.com header.b=mTE+a6Ii; arc=none smtp.client-ip=79.135.106.112 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=geanix.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=geanix.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=geanix.com header.i=@geanix.com header.b="mTE+a6Ii" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=geanix.com; s=protonmail; t=1786967859; x=1787227059; bh=ODya+Y+AGK2+nAfOrXSVae8nPCcCmn2ucJxG3HkcA68=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID:From:To: Cc:Date:Subject:Reply-To:Feedback-ID:Message-ID:BIMI-Selector; b=mTE+a6IidtwEC7t5kjO6FwyuG24OrTAUr+++kxjAo79vK8asHzLK6kxE/OxU5w1Vc AFaJmrKTOEEmTUMgwQB3+wJbBFmnZm8xvYkgRlWqnimTxmfed0gPAGgG2cck2vYHLH ykmYjJupPeTbwRsFtwASmuy56mvmJ/pV1zCyufYo88WAzKGkCsHtsnGeRsLeyWy7Nl ASeOUHQIrs8fln7RF9xYoW3cvQ8/ylTqJXkY0sdIvbG7UNiHkW7EH0PO9wDG77eg7Z 3/jwjywfL2c5rNuRmzp6QUcrDyihXs27gk1eaT0Z5V7UKstADX/wLs/T1HzWyVQMwx a64SN9EscaZHA== X-Pm-Submission-Id: 4hNrtQ6WpRz1DDLk From: Esben Haabendal To: "Jonathan Cameron" Cc: "Rob Herring" , "David Lechner" , Nuno =?utf-8?Q?S=C3=A1?= , "Andy Shevchenko" , "Krzysztof Kozlowski" , "Conor Dooley" , "Nikita Travkin" , "Maslov Dmitry" , "Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan" , "Thomas Gleixner" , "Pan Chuang" , "Yangtao Li" , , , , "Krzysztof Kozlowski" Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 3/7] dt-bindings: iio: light: ltr501: Add ltr329 compatible In-Reply-To: <20260815043403.07f9cc58@jic23-huawei> (Jonathan Cameron's message of "Sat, 15 Aug 2026 04:34:03 +0100") References: <20260810-liteon-ltr329-v4-0-8bd3dfd15280@geanix.com> <20260810-liteon-ltr329-v4-3-8bd3dfd15280@geanix.com> <20260810155006.GA1815611-robh@kernel.org> <20260815043403.07f9cc58@jic23-huawei> Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2026 13:57:34 +0200 Message-ID: <877blpklht.fsf@geanix.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain "Jonathan Cameron" writes: > On Fri, 14 Aug 2026 12:39:45 +0000 > Esben Haabendal wrote: > >> On Friday, August 14th, 2026 at 08:18, Esben Haabendal wrote: >> >> > On Monday, August 10th, 2026 at 17:50, Rob Herring wrote: >> > >> > > On Mon, Aug 10, 2026 at 09:11:13AM +0200, Esben Haabendal wrote: >> > > > LTR-329ALS-01 is an ambient light sensor similar to LTR-303ALS-01, but >> > > > without interrupt support. >> > > > >> > > > Acked-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski >> > > > Acked-by: Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan >> > > > Signed-off-by: Esben Haabendal >> > > > --- >> > > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/light/liteon,ltr501.yaml | 1 + >> > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) >> > > >> > > sashiko issue should be addressed. >> > >> > What about the suggestion about adding `proximity-near-level: false` to the condition. I am thinking something like this is more correct >> > >> > properties: >> > proximity-near-level: false >> > >> > allOf: >> > - if: >> > properties: >> > compatible: >> > contains: >> > enum: >> > - liteon,ltr501 >> > - liteon,ltr559 >> > then: >> > properties: >> > proximity-near-level: true >> > >> > As it is only valid for those two chips, and it seems more logical to do a white-list than the opposite. >> >> I hope it is okay to do this change in a follow-up series to this one, so we can get it merged sooner rather than later. > > Whilst this looks to be in a good state to merge, timing is such that > it is next cycle material anyway at this point unfortunately. > So if you don't mind tidying this up as part of your series, I'd > definitely prefer that. I will try to do that then. I will be away in the next 7-8 days, so will not have a good way to actually test any additional changes requested in that period. /Esben