[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20250328-lively-axiomatic-starfish-f9c0df@krzk-bin>
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2025 09:02:37 +0100
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
To: Sricharan R <quic_srichara@...cinc.com>
Cc: jassisinghbrar@...il.com, robh@...nel.org, krzk+dt@...nel.org,
conor+dt@...nel.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, andersson@...nel.org, konradybcio@...nel.org,
manivannan.sadhasivam@...aro.org, dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V4 1/2] dt-bindings: mailbox: Document qcom,ipq5424-tmel
On Thu, Mar 27, 2025 at 11:47:49PM +0530, Sricharan R wrote:
> +properties:
> + compatible:
> + items:
> + - enum:
> + - qcom,ipq5424-tmel
blank line
> + reg:
> + maxItems: 1
> +
> + interrupts:
> + maxItems: 1
> +
> + mboxes:
> + maxItems: 1
Why mbox is having an mbox? This does not look right and suggest the
block is misrepresented. I read the diagram and description two times
and still do not see how this fits there.
> +
> + "#mbox-cells":
> + const: 1
Best regards,
Krzysztof
Powered by blists - more mailing lists