[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <05a6f073-7002-0156-1225-cd838e482307@linaro.org>
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2023 19:08:03 +0100
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
To: Stefan Hansson <newbyte@...tmarketos.org>,
Andy Gross <agross@...nel.org>,
Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>,
soc@...nel.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Cc: ~postmarketos/upstreaming@...ts.sr.ht, phone-devel@...r.kernel.org,
matti.lehtimaki@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] dt-bindings: arm: qcom: Add MSM8926 and Samsung
Galaxy Tab 4 10.1 LTE
On 23/01/2023 18:41, Stefan Hansson wrote:
>>>
>>> 2. You base on other SoC but you do not include its compatibles. Why? Is
>>> it intended? None of the properties applicable to other SoC will match
>>> here, thus I actually wonder if you run dtbs_check...
>
> Sorry, I forgot about running dtbs_check. However, I'm not sure I
> understand the question. What do you mean by that I don't include its
> compatibles?
I understood you include the msm8226.dtsi which is a different SoC. If
you include it, you get all of its content. We do it only for compatible
devices, but your device does not indicate compatibility with msm8226.
>
> I ran `$ make dtbs_check DT_SCHEMA_FILES=qcom.yaml` locally just now,
> and it only gave me errors from the qcom-msm8974pro-oneplus-bacon dtb.
> Maybe I'm running it wrong?
No clue, I cannot test because your patches do not apply cleanly.
Best regards,
Krzysztof
Powered by blists - more mailing lists