[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20211028074945.rv2j5kgzk7yc2srr@mobilestation>
Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2021 10:49:45 +0300
From: Serge Semin <fancer.lancer@...il.com>
To: Brad Larson <brad@...sando.io>
Cc: Serge Semin <Sergey.Semin@...kalelectronics.ru>,
Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, arnd@...db.de,
linus.walleij@...aro.org, bgolaszewski@...libre.com,
broonie@...nel.org, adrian.hunter@...el.com,
ulf.hansson@...aro.org, olof@...om.net, linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org,
linux-spi@...r.kernel.org, linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 05/11] spi: dw: Add Pensando Elba SoC SPI Controller
bindings
On Sun, Oct 24, 2021 at 06:51:50PM -0700, Brad Larson wrote:
> The Pensando Elba SoC has integrated the DW APB SPI Controller
Please add the "dt-bindings: " prefix to the patch name and discard
the word "bindings" from the title as the submitting DT-patches
requires:
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/submitting-patches.rst
>
> Signed-off-by: Brad Larson <brad@...sando.io>
> ---
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/snps,dw-apb-ssi.yaml | 2 ++
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/snps,dw-apb-ssi.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/snps,dw-apb-ssi.yaml
> index d7e08b03e204..0b5ebb2ae6e7 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/snps,dw-apb-ssi.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/snps,dw-apb-ssi.yaml
> @@ -73,6 +73,8 @@ properties:
> - renesas,r9a06g032-spi # RZ/N1D
> - renesas,r9a06g033-spi # RZ/N1S
> - const: renesas,rzn1-spi # RZ/N1
> + - description: Pensando Elba SoC SPI Controller
> + const: pensando,elba-spi
AFAICS from the driver-part of the patchset it's not enough. You've
also got the syscon phandle, which needs to be reflected in the
bindings. That also makes me thinking that you didn't perform the
"dtbs_check" on the dts-files you were going to submit, but for some
reason discarded from this series (btw why?). If you did you would
have got an error of an unevaluated property detection.
-Sergey
>
> reg:
> minItems: 1
> --
> 2.17.1
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists