| Message ID | 20210909060450.10111-1-david@ixit.cz (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Changes Requested |
| Headers | show |
| Series | dt-bindings: arm: qcom: add ipq4019 standalone entry | expand |
On Thu 09 Sep 01:04 CDT 2021, David Heidelberg wrote: > It seems that some ipq4019 boards just accepted architecture. > > Signed-off-by: David Heidelberg <david@ixit.cz> > --- > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom.yaml | 3 +++ > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom.yaml > index 5169ebb97946..9b6dd7dc3825 100644 > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom.yaml > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom.yaml > @@ -174,6 +174,9 @@ properties: > - qcom,ipq4019-dk04.1-c1 > - const: qcom,ipq4019 It seems reasonable to expect that the board isn't just a "qcom,ipq4019" and in that case I believe this should cover all boards. Please let me know if I'm misunderstanding things. Regards, Bjorn > > + - items: > + - const: qcom,ipq4019 > + > - items: > - enum: > - qcom,ipq8064-ap148 > -- > 2.33.0 >
Yeah, this one patch is nonsense. Sending new patch series adding compatible to the IPQ40xx/AP-DK01.1-C1 instead of accepting generic board compatible. David On Sun, Sep 19 2021 at 23:19:19 -0500, Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@linaro.org> wrote: > On Thu 09 Sep 01:04 CDT 2021, David Heidelberg wrote: > >> It seems that some ipq4019 boards just accepted architecture. >> >> Signed-off-by: David Heidelberg <david@ixit.cz> >> --- >> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom.yaml | 3 +++ >> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom.yaml >> b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom.yaml >> index 5169ebb97946..9b6dd7dc3825 100644 >> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom.yaml >> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom.yaml >> @@ -174,6 +174,9 @@ properties: >> - qcom,ipq4019-dk04.1-c1 >> - const: qcom,ipq4019 > > It seems reasonable to expect that the board isn't just a > "qcom,ipq4019" > and in that case I believe this should cover all boards. > > Please let me know if I'm misunderstanding things. > > Regards, > Bjorn > >> >> + - items: >> + - const: qcom,ipq4019 >> + >> - items: >> - enum: >> - qcom,ipq8064-ap148 >> -- >> 2.33.0 >>
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom.yaml index 5169ebb97946..9b6dd7dc3825 100644 --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom.yaml +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom.yaml @@ -174,6 +174,9 @@ properties: - qcom,ipq4019-dk04.1-c1 - const: qcom,ipq4019 + - items: + - const: qcom,ipq4019 + - items: - enum: - qcom,ipq8064-ap148
It seems that some ipq4019 boards just accepted architecture. Signed-off-by: David Heidelberg <david@ixit.cz> --- Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom.yaml | 3 +++ 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)