Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Message-ID: <ff5b09db-4900-0b5b-e821-fa05b8d907a4@linaro.org>
Date:   Tue, 20 Dec 2022 11:50:05 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/102.6.0
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: dts: ti: k3-j721s2: Add support for ADC nodes
Content-Language: en-US
To:     Bhavya Kapoor <b-kapoor@ti.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        devicetree@vger.kernel.org
Cc:     linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
        krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org, robh+dt@kernel.org,
        kristo@kernel.org, nm@ti.com
References: <20221220101249.46450-1-b-kapoor@ti.com>
From:   Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>
In-Reply-To: <20221220101249.46450-1-b-kapoor@ti.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On 20/12/2022 11:12, Bhavya Kapoor wrote:
> J721s2 has two instances of 8 channel ADCs in MCU domain. Add DT nodes
> for 8 channel ADCs for J721s2 SoC.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Bhavya Kapoor <b-kapoor@ti.com>
> ---
>  .../dts/ti/k3-j721s2-common-proc-board.dts    | 14 +++++++
>  .../boot/dts/ti/k3-j721s2-mcu-wakeup.dtsi     | 42 ++++++++++++++++++-
>  2 files changed, 55 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j721s2-common-proc-board.dts b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j721s2-common-proc-board.dts
> index a7aa6cf08acd..67593aa69327 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j721s2-common-proc-board.dts
> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j721s2-common-proc-board.dts
> @@ -309,3 +309,17 @@ &mcu_mcan1 {
>  	pinctrl-0 = <&mcu_mcan1_pins_default>;
>  	phys = <&transceiver2>;
>  };
> +
> +&tscadc0 {
> +	status = "okay";
> +	adc {
> +		ti,adc-channels = <0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7>;
> +	};
> +};
> +
> +&tscadc1 {
> +	status = "okay";
> +	adc {
> +		ti,adc-channels = <0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7>;
> +	};
> +};
> \ No newline at end of file

This is a friendly reminder during the review process.

It seems my previous comments were not fully addressed. Maybe my
feedback got lost between the quotes, maybe you just forgot to apply it.
Please go back to the previous discussion and either implement all
requested changes or keep discussing them.

Thank you.

Best regards,
Krzysztof