'<&gpio1 parameters &gpio2 parameters>' and '<&gpio1 parameters>,
<&gpio2 parameters>' result in the same DTB, but second format has
better source code readability. Also 'dtbs_check' currently uses
this format to determine the amount of items specified, so using
this syntax is needed to successfully verify the devicetree source
against a DT schema format.
Cc: Tony Lindgren <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Signed-off-by: Sebastian Reichel <[email protected]>
---
.../arm/boot/dts/motorola-cpcap-mapphone.dtsi | 59 +++++++++----------
1 file changed, 28 insertions(+), 31 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/motorola-cpcap-mapphone.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/motorola-cpcap-mapphone.dtsi
index 08a7d3ce383f..ea02fd403a9b 100644
--- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/motorola-cpcap-mapphone.dtsi
+++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/motorola-cpcap-mapphone.dtsi
@@ -27,16 +27,14 @@ cpcap_adc: adc {
cpcap_battery: battery {
compatible = "motorola,cpcap-battery";
- interrupts-extended = <
- &cpcap 6 0 &cpcap 5 0 &cpcap 3 0
- &cpcap 20 0 &cpcap 54 0 &cpcap 57 0
- >;
+ interrupts-extended =
+ <&cpcap 6 0>, <&cpcap 5 0>, <&cpcap 3 0>,
+ <&cpcap 20 0>, <&cpcap 54 0>, <&cpcap 57 0>;
interrupt-names =
"eol", "lowbph", "lowbpl",
- "chrgcurr1", "battdetb",
- "cccal";
- io-channels = <&cpcap_adc 0 &cpcap_adc 1
- &cpcap_adc 5 &cpcap_adc 6>;
+ "chrgcurr1", "battdetb", "cccal";
+ io-channels = <&cpcap_adc 0>, <&cpcap_adc 1>,
+ <&cpcap_adc 5>, <&cpcap_adc 6>;
io-channel-names = "battdetb", "battp",
"chg_isense", "batti";
power-supplies = <&cpcap_charger>;
@@ -44,20 +42,19 @@ &cpcap 20 0 &cpcap 54 0 &cpcap 57 0
cpcap_charger: charger {
compatible = "motorola,mapphone-cpcap-charger";
- interrupts-extended = <
- &cpcap 13 0 &cpcap 12 0 &cpcap 29 0 &cpcap 28 0
- &cpcap 22 0 &cpcap 21 0 &cpcap 20 0 &cpcap 19 0
- &cpcap 54 0
- >;
+ interrupts-extended =
+ <&cpcap 13 0>, <&cpcap 12 0>, <&cpcap 29 0>,
+ <&cpcap 28 0>, <&cpcap 22 0>, <&cpcap 21 0>,
+ <&cpcap 20 0>, <&cpcap 19 0>, <&cpcap 54 0>;
interrupt-names =
- "chrg_det", "rvrs_chrg", "chrg_se1b", "se0conn",
- "rvrs_mode", "chrgcurr2", "chrgcurr1", "vbusvld",
- "battdetb";
- mode-gpios = <&gpio3 29 GPIO_ACTIVE_LOW
- &gpio3 23 GPIO_ACTIVE_LOW>;
- io-channels = <&cpcap_adc 0 &cpcap_adc 1
- &cpcap_adc 2 &cpcap_adc 5
- &cpcap_adc 6>;
+ "chrg_det", "rvrs_chrg", "chrg_se1b",
+ "se0conn", "rvrs_mode", "chrgcurr2",
+ "chrgcurr1", "vbusvld", "battdetb";
+ mode-gpios = <&gpio3 29 GPIO_ACTIVE_LOW>,
+ <&gpio3 23 GPIO_ACTIVE_LOW>;
+ io-channels = <&cpcap_adc 0>, <&cpcap_adc 1>,
+ <&cpcap_adc 2>, <&cpcap_adc 5>,
+ <&cpcap_adc 6>;
io-channel-names = "battdetb", "battp",
"vbus", "chg_isense",
"batti";
@@ -98,22 +95,22 @@ power_button: button {
cpcap_usb2_phy: phy {
compatible = "motorola,mapphone-cpcap-usb-phy";
- pinctrl-0 = <&usb_gpio_mux_sel1 &usb_gpio_mux_sel2>;
+ pinctrl-0 = <&usb_gpio_mux_sel1>, <&usb_gpio_mux_sel2>;
pinctrl-1 = <&usb_ulpi_pins>;
pinctrl-2 = <&usb_utmi_pins>;
pinctrl-3 = <&uart3_pins>;
pinctrl-names = "default", "ulpi", "utmi", "uart";
#phy-cells = <0>;
- interrupts-extended = <
- &cpcap 15 0 &cpcap 14 0 &cpcap 28 0 &cpcap 19 0
- &cpcap 18 0 &cpcap 17 0 &cpcap 16 0 &cpcap 49 0
- &cpcap 48 0
- >;
+ interrupts-extended =
+ <&cpcap 15 0>, <&cpcap 14 0>, <&cpcap 28 0>,
+ <&cpcap 19 0>, <&cpcap 18 0>, <&cpcap 17 0>,
+ <&cpcap 16 0>, <&cpcap 49 0>, <&cpcap 48 0>;
interrupt-names =
- "id_ground", "id_float", "se0conn", "vbusvld",
- "sessvld", "sessend", "se1", "dm", "dp";
- mode-gpios = <&gpio2 28 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH
- &gpio1 0 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>;
+ "id_ground", "id_float", "se0conn",
+ "vbusvld", "sessvld", "sessend",
+ "se1", "dm", "dp";
+ mode-gpios = <&gpio2 28 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>,
+ <&gpio1 0 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>;
io-channels = <&cpcap_adc 2>, <&cpcap_adc 7>;
io-channel-names = "vbus", "id";
vusb-supply = <&vusb>;
--
2.30.2
* Sebastian Reichel <[email protected]> [210317 13:50]:
> '<&gpio1 parameters &gpio2 parameters>' and '<&gpio1 parameters>,
> <&gpio2 parameters>' result in the same DTB, but second format has
> better source code readability. Also 'dtbs_check' currently uses
> this format to determine the amount of items specified, so using
> this syntax is needed to successfully verify the devicetree source
> against a DT schema format.
Looks good to me:
Acked-by: Tony Lindgren <[email protected]>
Hi Tony,
On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 04:29:19PM +0200, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> * Sebastian Reichel <[email protected]> [210317 13:50]:
> > '<&gpio1 parameters &gpio2 parameters>' and '<&gpio1 parameters>,
> > <&gpio2 parameters>' result in the same DTB, but second format has
> > better source code readability. Also 'dtbs_check' currently uses
> > this format to determine the amount of items specified, so using
> > this syntax is needed to successfully verify the devicetree source
> > against a DT schema format.
>
> Looks good to me:
>
> Acked-by: Tony Lindgren <[email protected]>
Please take this patch via your tree. I will take the other ones
through the power-supply tree.
Thanks,
-- Sebastian
* Sebastian Reichel <[email protected]> [210323 12:52]:
> Hi Tony,
>
> On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 04:29:19PM +0200, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> > * Sebastian Reichel <[email protected]> [210317 13:50]:
> > > '<&gpio1 parameters &gpio2 parameters>' and '<&gpio1 parameters>,
> > > <&gpio2 parameters>' result in the same DTB, but second format has
> > > better source code readability. Also 'dtbs_check' currently uses
> > > this format to determine the amount of items specified, so using
> > > this syntax is needed to successfully verify the devicetree source
> > > against a DT schema format.
> >
> > Looks good to me:
> >
> > Acked-by: Tony Lindgren <[email protected]>
>
> Please take this patch via your tree. I will take the other ones
> through the power-supply tree.
OK will do.
Thanks,
Tony