[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <f542defa-3c87-a138-8bf1-4986c6bde832@linaro.org>
Date: Sat, 25 Jun 2022 22:07:47 +0200
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
To: Guru Das Srinagesh <quic_gurus@...cinc.com>,
Robert Marko <robimarko@...il.com>
Cc: Andy Gross <agross@...nel.org>,
Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org,
linux-arm-msm <linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>,
Devicetree List <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: firmware: qcom-scm: convert to dtschema
On 25/06/2022 03:57, Guru Das Srinagesh wrote:
> On Jun 24 2022 10:50, Robert Marko wrote:
>> On Fri, 24 Jun 2022 at 03:01, Guru Das Srinagesh <quic_gurus@...cinc.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jun 23, 2022 at 08:25:42PM +0200, Robert Marko wrote:
>>>
>>>> +
>>>> +description: |
>>> ...
>>>> +
>>>> + '#reset-cells':
>>>> + const: 1
>>>
>>> This isn't part of the original file - could you please explain why this is
>>> being added?
>>
>> Yes, its not part of the original file, however I noticed that a lot of SCM
>> nodes were adding #reset-cells, and upon looking at the SCM code its
>> clear that it is being registered as a reset controller so #reset-cells are
>> appropriate.
>>
>> However, since its not really being used via phandles #reset-cells did
>> not really matter, hence why I did not add them to be required,
>> this is something that DT guys can probably clarify.
>
> Makes sense, ACK.
Please mention deviations from conversion in the commit msg.
Best regards,
Krzysztof
Powered by blists - more mailing lists