[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <24e81091-e0f9-40c7-b781-10354b4a3ea2@kernel.org>
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2024 10:50:41 +0100
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
To: Stanislav Jakubek <stano.jakubek@...il.com>
Cc: Lee Jones <lee@...nel.org>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>, Conor Dooley
<conor+dt@...nel.org>, Orson Zhai <orsonzhai@...il.com>,
Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@...ux.alibaba.com>,
Chunyan Zhang <zhang.lyra@...il.com>, Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>,
Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>, Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@...aro.org>,
Sebastian Reichel <sre@...nel.org>, Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-iio@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-leds@...r.kernel.org,
linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, linux-rtc@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] dt-bindings: mfd: sprd,sc2731: convert to YAML
On 30/10/2024 09:14, Stanislav Jakubek wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 30, 2024 at 08:48:25AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 30/10/2024 08:42, Stanislav Jakubek wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> +
>>>>> + '#address-cells':
>>>>> + const: 1
>>>>> +
>>>>> + '#interrupt-cells':
>>>>> + const: 1
>>>>> +
>>>>> + '#size-cells':
>>>>> + const: 0
>>>>> +
>>>>> + regulators:
>>>>> + type: object
>>>>> + $ref: /schemas/regulator/sprd,sc2731-regulator.yaml#
>>>>> +
>>>>> +patternProperties:
>>>>> + "^adc@[0-9a-f]+$":
>>>>> + type: object
>>>>> + $ref: /schemas/iio/adc/sprd,sc2720-adc.yaml#
>>>>> +
>>>>> + "^charger@[0-9a-f]+$":
>>>>> + type: object
>>>>> + $ref: /schemas/power/supply/sc2731-charger.yaml#
>>>>> +
>>>>> + "^efuse@[0-9a-f]+$":
>>>>> + type: object
>>>>> + $ref: /schemas/nvmem/sprd,sc2731-efuse.yaml#
>>>>
>>>> I don't think this was merged. You still have dependency.
>>>
>>> This is in next-20241029, which this patch is based on.
>>
>> Try what I wrote below and see if this works...
>
> I assume you meant the MFD maintainers' tree here.
> Yes, that tree doesn't have the nvmem patch this depends on.
>
> Would the approach with listing the compatibles and additionalProperties:
> true be considered a temporary workaround?
Not really, it's a correct approach. The node will be validated anyway
by efuse/child schema.
Best regards,
Krzysztof
Powered by blists - more mailing lists