[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <DDKE88TY46WS.1XKHP5I1S3CF6@linaro.org>
Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2025 07:45:50 +0100
From: "Alexey Klimov" <alexey.klimov@...aro.org>
To: "Krzysztof Kozlowski" <krzk@...nel.org>, <lee@...nel.org>,
<robh@...nel.org>, <krzk+dt@...nel.org>, <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
<sboyd@...nel.org>
Cc: <linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>, <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <srini@...nel.org>,
<krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>, <linux-sound@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] dt-bindings: mfd: qcom,spmi-pmic: add compatibles
for audio blocks
On Fri Oct 17, 2025 at 7:25 AM BST, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 17/10/2025 08:13, Alexey Klimov wrote:
>> If/when pm4125 audio codec will be added to a device tree file, then dtbs
>> check will emit messages that pmic audio-codec@...0 doesn't match any
>> of the regexes: '^pinctrl-[0-9]+$'.
>
>
> Future errors because of present mistakes are not a reason to do
> something. This makes no sense because there is no DTBs with that
> compatible, so drop this sentence. We never document compatibles,
> because in the future they will be errors (if I get it right?).
Ok. I can hold it off till it will be started to be used then.
>> Add the compatibles for two possible audio codecs so the devicetree for
>> such audio blocks of PMIC can be validated properly while also
>> removing reference to qcom,pm8916-wcd-analog-codec schema file.
>
> And that's now incomplete. You add new device here and because preferred
> and sufficient is to list compatibles, you change existing audio codec
> child schema reference into just list of compatibles.
So the way I understand this is that commit description is incomplete.
I can change it to your liking, okay.
FWIW, "add new device here" is said as
"Add the compatibles for two possible audio codecs" and removal of
child schema reference is also mentioned as "while also
removing reference to qcom,pm8916-wcd-analog-codec schema file".
But I can change it, okay.
>> Suggested-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
>
>
> I don't think I suggested this patch. What's more, it wasn't here at v4.
The original idea was to fix the warning or error emitted by dtbs check
but now the whole body os the change is your suggestion. Now it seems
it was not even needed at that point earlier which is a new finding.
Your prefference -- drop it or keep it.
>> Signed-off-by: Alexey Klimov <alexey.klimov@...aro.org>
Best regards,
Alexey
Powered by blists - more mailing lists