[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAJKOXPewAhZU1Enz9HrdrG5RF==y6Mna=E_vfpD4u2747CVo8A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2020 11:21:10 +0200
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
To: Alexander Dahl <post@...pocky.de>
Cc: linux-leds@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
"linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org"
<linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org>, linux-omap@...r.kernel.org,
linux-stm32@...md-mailman.stormreply.com,
linux-amlogic@...ts.infradead.org, linux-mips@...r.kernel.org,
Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>, Dan Murphy <dmurphy@...com>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Alexander Dahl <ada@...rsis.com>,
Peter Ujfalusi <peter.ujfalusi@...com>,
Jacek Anaszewski <jacek.anaszewski@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 3/7] dt-bindings: mfd: Fix schema warnings for pwm-leds
On Thu, 1 Oct 2020 at 01:51, Alexander Dahl <post@...pocky.de> wrote:
>
> The node names for devices using the pwm-leds driver follow a certain
> naming scheme (now).
What warning? Please post them here and in every DTS patch.
Your schema does not enforce pwmleds node naming (the main node, not
children), or at least I could not see it. You change multiple files
in your patchset so are you sure that all these are justified by
warnings pointed out by schema?
Best regards,
Krzysztof
Powered by blists - more mailing lists