It shouldn't have been the case that it wasn't required. The kernel
devicetrees already specified it where compatible nodes were defined,
and u-boot pulls in the kernel devicetrees, so this should have minimal
practical impact.
Signed-off-by: Andrew Jeffery <[email protected]>
---
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/aspeed,sgpio.yaml | 1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/aspeed,sgpio.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/aspeed,sgpio.yaml
index 02c02ef97565..433b50bd5484 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/aspeed,sgpio.yaml
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/aspeed,sgpio.yaml
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ required:
- clocks
- interrupts
- interrupt-controller
+ - '#interrupt-cells'
- gpio-controller
- '#gpio-cells'
- ngpios
--
2.39.2
On 29/05/2024 07:13, Andrew Jeffery wrote:
> It shouldn't have been the case that it wasn't required. The kernel
> devicetrees already specified it where compatible nodes were defined,
> and u-boot pulls in the kernel devicetrees, so this should have minimal
> practical impact.
>
This should be squashed with previous patch.
Best regards,
Krzysztof
On Wed, 2024-05-29 at 09:28 +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 29/05/2024 07:13, Andrew Jeffery wrote:
> > It shouldn't have been the case that it wasn't required. The kernel
> > devicetrees already specified it where compatible nodes were defined,
> > and u-boot pulls in the kernel devicetrees, so this should have minimal
> > practical impact.
> >
>
> This should be squashed with previous patch.
>
Sure, will do.
Andrew