[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <f2b5592e-16e2-4621-8691-82cb0e49def1@linaro.org>
Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2024 22:28:55 +0200
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
To: mr.nuke.me@...il.com, Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>, Vinod Koul <vkoul@...nel.org>,
Kishon Vijay Abraham I <kishon@...nel.org>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-phy@...ts.infradead.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 5/7] dt-bindings: phy: qcom,ipq8074-qmp-pcie: add
ipq9574 gen3x2 PHY
On 09/04/2024 22:19, mr.nuke.me@...il.com wrote:
>> Which binding inspired you to such change? No, you need maxItems. See
>> your previous patches here how it is done.
>>
>>
>>>
>>> clock-names:
>>> items:
>>> - const: aux
>>> - const: cfg_ahb
>>> - const: pipe
>>> + - const: anoc
>>> + - const: snoc
>>
>> OK, you did not test it. Neither this, nor DTS. I stop review, please
>> test first.
>
> I ran both `checkpatch.pl` and `make dt_binding_check`. What in this
> patch makes you say I "did not test it", and what test or tests did I miss?
You affect existing bindings, so you must test your and entire existing
DTS. You affect, by introducing new errors, in existing DTS.
Best regards,
Krzysztof
Powered by blists - more mailing lists