[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YryrpbBKsAKcL865@shikoro>
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2022 21:44:37 +0200
From: Wolfram Sang <wsa@...nel.org>
To: Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
Cc: Alain Volmat <alain.volmat@...s.st.com>, mark.rutland@....com,
pierre-yves.mordret@...s.st.com, mcoquelin.stm32@...il.com,
alexandre.torgue@...s.st.com, linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
linux-stm32@...md-mailman.stormreply.com,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
fabrice.gasnier@...s.st.com, amelie.delaunay@...s.st.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] dt-bindings: i2c: st,stm32-i2c: don't mandate a
reset line
On Tue, Jun 28, 2022 at 07:41:15AM -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 20, 2022 at 12:54:02PM +0200, Alain Volmat wrote:
> > Update the dt-bindings of the i2c-stm32 drivers to avoid the
> > needs for a reset property in the device-tree.
>
> That is clear from the diff, but why. Some chips don't have a reset?
> If so, this should be combined with patch 2 as part of changes needed
> for a new version.
What do you mean? Patches 1+2 should be squashed together? I can do this
when applying. Or do you mean something else?
>
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Alain Volmat <alain.volmat@...s.st.com>
> > ---
> > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/st,stm32-i2c.yaml | 1 -
> > 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/st,stm32-i2c.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/st,stm32-i2c.yaml
> > index dccbb18b6dc0..8879144fbbfb 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/st,stm32-i2c.yaml
> > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/st,stm32-i2c.yaml
> > @@ -94,7 +94,6 @@ required:
> > - compatible
> > - reg
> > - interrupts
> > - - resets
> > - clocks
> >
> > unevaluatedProperties: false
> > --
> > 2.25.1
> >
> >
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (834 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists