CYW4373A0 is a Wi-Fi + Bluetooth combo device from Cypress.
This chip is present e.g. on muRata 2AE module. Extend the
binding with its DT compatible.
Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut <[email protected]>
---
Cc: Hakan Jansson <[email protected]>
Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski <[email protected]>
Cc: Linus Walleij <[email protected]>
Cc: Luiz Augusto von Dentz <[email protected]>
Cc: Marcel Holtmann <[email protected]>
Cc: Rob Herring <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
---
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/broadcom-bluetooth.yaml | 1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/broadcom-bluetooth.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/broadcom-bluetooth.yaml
index 445b2a5536259..e0c8abc274134 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/broadcom-bluetooth.yaml
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/broadcom-bluetooth.yaml
@@ -24,6 +24,7 @@ properties:
- brcm,bcm43540-bt
- brcm,bcm4335a0
- brcm,bcm4349-bt
+ - cypress,cyw4373a0-bt
- infineon,cyw55572-bt
shutdown-gpios:
--
2.35.1
This is automated email and please do not reply to this email!
Dear submitter,
Thank you for submitting the patches to the linux bluetooth mailing list.
This is a CI test results with your patch series:
PW Link:https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/bluetooth/list/?series=690631
---Test result---
Test Summary:
CheckPatch PASS 2.99 seconds
GitLint PASS 1.48 seconds
SubjectPrefix FAIL 0.58 seconds
BuildKernel PASS 34.02 seconds
BuildKernel32 PASS 30.96 seconds
Incremental Build with patchesPASS 54.02 seconds
TestRunner: Setup PASS 513.84 seconds
TestRunner: l2cap-tester PASS 17.53 seconds
TestRunner: iso-tester PASS 16.75 seconds
TestRunner: bnep-tester PASS 6.65 seconds
TestRunner: mgmt-tester PASS 106.19 seconds
TestRunner: rfcomm-tester PASS 10.48 seconds
TestRunner: sco-tester PASS 9.85 seconds
TestRunner: ioctl-tester PASS 11.30 seconds
TestRunner: mesh-tester PASS 8.02 seconds
TestRunner: smp-tester PASS 9.87 seconds
TestRunner: userchan-tester PASS 6.82 seconds
Details
##############################
Test: SubjectPrefix - FAIL - 0.58 seconds
Check subject contains "Bluetooth" prefix
"Bluetooth: " is not specified in the subject
---
Regards,
Linux Bluetooth
On Mon, Oct 31, 2022 at 9:48 PM Marek Vasut <[email protected]> wrote:
> CYW4373A0 is a Wi-Fi + Bluetooth combo device from Cypress.
> This chip is present e.g. on muRata 2AE module. Extend the
> binding with its DT compatible.
>
> Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Linus Walleij <[email protected]>
Yours,
Linus Walleij
On 10/31/22 23:07, [email protected] wrote:
> This is automated email and please do not reply to this email!
>
> Dear submitter,
>
> Thank you for submitting the patches to the linux bluetooth mailing list.
> This is a CI test results with your patch series:
> PW Link:https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/bluetooth/list/?series=690631
>
> ---Test result---
>
> Test Summary:
> CheckPatch PASS 2.99 seconds
> GitLint PASS 1.48 seconds
> SubjectPrefix FAIL 0.58 seconds
Should the DT bindings really have Bluetooth: prefix/tag too ?
git log on prior art indicates they shouldn't .
Hi Linus,
On Tue, Nov 1, 2022 at 3:30 PM Linus Walleij <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Oct 31, 2022 at 9:48 PM Marek Vasut <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > CYW4373A0 is a Wi-Fi + Bluetooth combo device from Cypress.
> > This chip is present e.g. on muRata 2AE module. Extend the
> > binding with its DT compatible.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut <[email protected]>
>
> Reviewed-by: Linus Walleij <[email protected]>
Should we have these changes in bluetooth-next or dt has a dedicated tree?
--
Luiz Augusto von Dentz
Hi Marek,
On Tue, Nov 1, 2022 at 3:38 PM Marek Vasut <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On 10/31/22 23:07, [email protected] wrote:
> > This is automated email and please do not reply to this email!
> >
> > Dear submitter,
> >
> > Thank you for submitting the patches to the linux bluetooth mailing list.
> > This is a CI test results with your patch series:
> > PW Link:https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/bluetooth/list/?series=690631
> >
> > ---Test result---
> >
> > Test Summary:
> > CheckPatch PASS 2.99 seconds
> > GitLint PASS 1.48 seconds
> > SubjectPrefix FAIL 0.58 seconds
>
> Should the DT bindings really have Bluetooth: prefix/tag too ?
> git log on prior art indicates they shouldn't .
If it is meant for bluetooth-next then yes it shall contain it since
the CI does attempt to check its presence, in the other hand we could
perhaps use the prefix [bluetooth] to avoid having the CI run on
patches that are not meant for bluetooth-next but I don't think other
subsystem do require this so it sort of hard to enforce proper
prefixing.
--
Luiz Augusto von Dentz
On 11/1/22 23:44, Luiz Augusto von Dentz wrote:
> Hi Marek,
Hi,
> On Tue, Nov 1, 2022 at 3:38 PM Marek Vasut <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> On 10/31/22 23:07, [email protected] wrote:
>>> This is automated email and please do not reply to this email!
>>>
>>> Dear submitter,
>>>
>>> Thank you for submitting the patches to the linux bluetooth mailing list.
>>> This is a CI test results with your patch series:
>>> PW Link:https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/bluetooth/list/?series=690631
>>>
>>> ---Test result---
>>>
>>> Test Summary:
>>> CheckPatch PASS 2.99 seconds
>>> GitLint PASS 1.48 seconds
>>> SubjectPrefix FAIL 0.58 seconds
>>
>> Should the DT bindings really have Bluetooth: prefix/tag too ?
>> git log on prior art indicates they shouldn't .
>
> If it is meant for bluetooth-next then yes it shall contain it since
> the CI does attempt to check its presence, in the other hand we could
> perhaps use the prefix [bluetooth] to avoid having the CI run on
> patches that are not meant for bluetooth-next but I don't think other
> subsystem do require this so it sort of hard to enforce proper
> prefixing.
Linux Documentation/devicetree/bindings seems to start with dt-bindings:
prefix always, so maybe we should keep it that way ?
This binding document seems to follow the scheme now too:
next$ git log --oneline --follow
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/broadcom-bluetooth.yaml
c8ce64900db47 dt-bindings: net: broadcom-bluetooth: Add conditional
constraints
cba6164f7c5e3 dt-bindings: net: broadcom-bluetooth: Add CYW55572 DT binding
88b65887aa1b7 dt-bindings: bluetooth: broadcom: Add BCM4349B1 DT binding
0b4de2523f281 dt-bindings: net: broadcom-bluetooth: Add property for
autobaud mode
88ffadce9d4cc dt-bindings: bluetooth: broadcom: Fix clocks check
71793730ebfdb Bluetooth: btbcm: Add BCM4334 DT binding
7820ee1c4757d Bluetooth: btbcm: Rewrite bindings in YAML and add reset
On Tue, Nov 01, 2022 at 11:52:23PM +0100, Marek Vasut wrote:
> On 11/1/22 23:44, Luiz Augusto von Dentz wrote:
> > Hi Marek,
>
> Hi,
>
> > On Tue, Nov 1, 2022 at 3:38 PM Marek Vasut <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > > On 10/31/22 23:07, [email protected] wrote:
> > > > This is automated email and please do not reply to this email!
> > > >
> > > > Dear submitter,
> > > >
> > > > Thank you for submitting the patches to the linux bluetooth mailing list.
> > > > This is a CI test results with your patch series:
> > > > PW Link:https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/bluetooth/list/?series=690631
> > > >
> > > > ---Test result---
> > > >
> > > > Test Summary:
> > > > CheckPatch PASS 2.99 seconds
> > > > GitLint PASS 1.48 seconds
> > > > SubjectPrefix FAIL 0.58 seconds
> > >
> > > Should the DT bindings really have Bluetooth: prefix/tag too ?
> > > git log on prior art indicates they shouldn't .
> >
> > If it is meant for bluetooth-next then yes it shall contain it since
> > the CI does attempt to check its presence, in the other hand we could
> > perhaps use the prefix [bluetooth] to avoid having the CI run on
> > patches that are not meant for bluetooth-next but I don't think other
> > subsystem do require this so it sort of hard to enforce proper
> > prefixing.
>
> Linux Documentation/devicetree/bindings seems to start with dt-bindings:
> prefix always, so maybe we should keep it that way ?
Yes.
On Tue, Nov 01, 2022 at 03:39:21PM -0700, Luiz Augusto von Dentz wrote:
> Hi Linus,
>
> On Tue, Nov 1, 2022 at 3:30 PM Linus Walleij <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Oct 31, 2022 at 9:48 PM Marek Vasut <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > CYW4373A0 is a Wi-Fi + Bluetooth combo device from Cypress.
> > > This chip is present e.g. on muRata 2AE module. Extend the
> > > binding with its DT compatible.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut <[email protected]>
> >
> > Reviewed-by: Linus Walleij <[email protected]>
>
> Should we have these changes in bluetooth-next or dt has a dedicated tree?
Most of the time, they go thru the subsystem trees like bluetooth-next.
Rob
On Mon, 31 Oct 2022 21:48:03 +0100, Marek Vasut wrote:
> CYW4373A0 is a Wi-Fi + Bluetooth combo device from Cypress.
> This chip is present e.g. on muRata 2AE module. Extend the
> binding with its DT compatible.
>
> Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut <[email protected]>
> ---
> Cc: Hakan Jansson <[email protected]>
> Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski <[email protected]>
> Cc: Linus Walleij <[email protected]>
> Cc: Luiz Augusto von Dentz <[email protected]>
> Cc: Marcel Holtmann <[email protected]>
> Cc: Rob Herring <[email protected]>
> Cc: [email protected]
> To: [email protected]
> ---
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/broadcom-bluetooth.yaml | 1 +
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>
Acked-by: Rob Herring <[email protected]>