As in other bindings, let's use specific compatibles together with the
fallback compatible. Adjust the bindings for it.
Signed-off-by: Luca Weiss <[email protected]>
---
Changes in v2:
* New patch
.../devicetree/bindings/iio/adc/qcom,spmi-iadc.yaml | 7 +++++--
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/adc/qcom,spmi-iadc.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/adc/qcom,spmi-iadc.yaml
index 2a94db688830..fa855baa368c 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/adc/qcom,spmi-iadc.yaml
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/adc/qcom,spmi-iadc.yaml
@@ -18,7 +18,10 @@ description: |
properties:
compatible:
- const: qcom,spmi-iadc
+ items:
+ - enum:
+ - qcom,pm8941-iadc
+ - const: qcom,spmi-iadc
reg:
description: IADC base address and length in the SPMI PMIC register map
@@ -50,7 +53,7 @@ examples:
#address-cells = <1>;
#size-cells = <0>;
pmic_iadc: adc@3600 {
- compatible = "qcom,spmi-iadc";
+ compatible = "qcom,pm8941-iadc", "qcom,spmi-iadc";
reg = <0x3600>;
interrupts = <0x0 0x36 0x0 IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING>;
qcom,external-resistor-micro-ohms = <10000>;
--
2.38.1
On Mon, Oct 31, 2022 at 07:24:54PM +0100, Luca Weiss wrote:
> As in other bindings, let's use specific compatibles together with the
> fallback compatible. Adjust the bindings for it.
You should state users are already doing this.
>
> Signed-off-by: Luca Weiss <[email protected]>
> ---
> Changes in v2:
> * New patch
>
> .../devicetree/bindings/iio/adc/qcom,spmi-iadc.yaml | 7 +++++--
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
Acked-by: Rob Herring <[email protected]>
On 31/10/2022 14:24, Luca Weiss wrote:
> As in other bindings, let's use specific compatibles together with the
> fallback compatible. Adjust the bindings for it.
>
> Signed-off-by: Luca Weiss <[email protected]>
> ---
> Changes in v2:
> * New patch
Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <[email protected]>
Best regards,
Krzysztof
On Wed, 2 Nov 2022 11:31:36 -0500
Rob Herring <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 31, 2022 at 07:24:54PM +0100, Luca Weiss wrote:
> > As in other bindings, let's use specific compatibles together with the
> > fallback compatible. Adjust the bindings for it.
>
> You should state users are already doing this.
>
I can fix that up whilst applying. However it raises the question:
Should I treat this as a fix, or a tidy up (that can wait for next merge window)?
I'm also fine with this going with the other patch in the series (that lore
found for me as it didn't go to linux-iio) if that makes more sense.
If that happens
Acked-by: Jonathan Cameron <[email protected]>
Jonathan
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Luca Weiss <[email protected]>
> > ---
> > Changes in v2:
> > * New patch
> >
> > .../devicetree/bindings/iio/adc/qcom,spmi-iadc.yaml | 7 +++++--
> > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> Acked-by: Rob Herring <[email protected]>
On Mon, 31 Oct 2022 19:24:54 +0100, Luca Weiss wrote:
> As in other bindings, let's use specific compatibles together with the
> fallback compatible. Adjust the bindings for it.
>
>
Applied, thanks!
[2/2] ARM: dts: qcom: pm8941: fix iadc node
commit: f659cd2770767c5ceabadace1b334df9de468eae
Best regards,
--
Bjorn Andersson <[email protected]>
Hi Jonathan,
On Sonntag, 6. November 2022 13:13:10 CET Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> On Wed, 2 Nov 2022 11:31:36 -0500
>
> Rob Herring <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 31, 2022 at 07:24:54PM +0100, Luca Weiss wrote:
> > > As in other bindings, let's use specific compatibles together with the
> > > fallback compatible. Adjust the bindings for it.
> >
> > You should state users are already doing this.
>
> I can fix that up whilst applying. However it raises the question:
> Should I treat this as a fix, or a tidy up (that can wait for next merge
> window)?
>
> I'm also fine with this going with the other patch in the series (that lore
> found for me as it didn't go to linux-iio) if that makes more sense.
>
Sorry for the delay in answering.
The dts patch (2/2) has already been picked up through qcom tree, so I think
you can apply this one to your tree.
It's definitely not urgent, so next merge window would be perfect.
Regards
Luca
> If that happens
>
> Acked-by: Jonathan Cameron <[email protected]>
>
> Jonathan
>
> > > Signed-off-by: Luca Weiss <[email protected]>
> > > ---
> > > Changes in v2:
> > > * New patch
> > >
> > > .../devicetree/bindings/iio/adc/qcom,spmi-iadc.yaml | 7 +++++--
> > > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > Acked-by: Rob Herring <[email protected]>
On Fri, 18 Nov 2022 18:10:17 +0100
Luca Weiss <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Jonathan,
>
> On Sonntag, 6. November 2022 13:13:10 CET Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> > On Wed, 2 Nov 2022 11:31:36 -0500
> >
> > Rob Herring <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > On Mon, Oct 31, 2022 at 07:24:54PM +0100, Luca Weiss wrote:
> > > > As in other bindings, let's use specific compatibles together with the
> > > > fallback compatible. Adjust the bindings for it.
> > >
> > > You should state users are already doing this.
> >
> > I can fix that up whilst applying. However it raises the question:
> > Should I treat this as a fix, or a tidy up (that can wait for next merge
> > window)?
> >
> > I'm also fine with this going with the other patch in the series (that lore
> > found for me as it didn't go to linux-iio) if that makes more sense.
> >
>
> Sorry for the delay in answering.
> The dts patch (2/2) has already been picked up through qcom tree, so I think
> you can apply this one to your tree.
> It's definitely not urgent, so next merge window would be perfect.
Applied
>
> Regards
> Luca
>
> > If that happens
> >
> > Acked-by: Jonathan Cameron <[email protected]>
> >
> > Jonathan
> >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Luca Weiss <[email protected]>
> > > > ---
> > > > Changes in v2:
> > > > * New patch
> > > >
> > > > .../devicetree/bindings/iio/adc/qcom,spmi-iadc.yaml | 7 +++++--
> > > > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > Acked-by: Rob Herring <[email protected]>
>
>
>
>