[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <578ea477-c68c-4427-8013-550bf4f9c05b@kernel.org>
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2025 13:01:06 +0200
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
To: Goran Radenovic <goran.radni@...il.com>
Cc: boerge.struempfel@...il.com, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>, Conor Dooley
<conor+dt@...nel.org>, Shawn Guo <shawnguo@...nel.org>,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] dt-bindings: arm: imx8mp: Add Ultratronik
Ultra-MACH SBC
On 12/06/2025 12:09, Goran Radenovic wrote:
> Hi Krzysztof,
>
> Thanks for the feedback, and you're absolutely right — I made a mistake
> here.
>
> That said, I’m still a bit confused by your earlier comment:
>
> "That's just part of the standard/first enum."
>
> I’m introducing a new board from a new manufacturer, so I expected to
> add a new enum block — similar to how it's done for other vendor entries
No, you are expected to add to existing enum.
> in the same file. I ran dt_binding_check, and it passed without errors
> for this structure.
Not possible. The syntax is clearly wrong, so there is no way it passed
any tests. And Rob's report is a proof of that.
>
> Could you clarify which “standard/first enum” you were referring to?
> Should all i.MX8MP-based boards share a single enum block, regardless of
> vendor?
Don't they? Look around in this file.
>
> Thanks again for your guidance.
Don't top post but reply inline.
Best regards,
Krzysztof
Powered by blists - more mailing lists