On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 12:02:47PM -0600, Rob Herring wrote: > On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 4:21 AM Manivannan Sadhasivam > <manivannan.sadhasivam@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > Add devicetree binding for Oxalis board in JSON format. While adding > > that, let's fix the description for LS1012A also. > > > > Signed-off-by: Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@xxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/fsl.yaml | 3 ++- > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/fsl.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/fsl.yaml > > index d34fe0749199..0f30142fe316 100644 > > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/fsl.yaml > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/fsl.yaml > > @@ -173,12 +173,13 @@ properties: > > - fsl,vf610 > > - fsl,vf610m4 > > > > - - description: LS1021A based Boards > > + - description: LS1012A based Boards > > Well, yes that was wrong... > > > items: > > - enum: > > - fsl,ls1012a-rdb > > - fsl,ls1012a-frdm > > - fsl,ls1012a-qds > > + - ebs-systart,oxalis > > Sort alphabetically. > > > - const: fsl,ls1021a > > And this is wrong too. > > I you just change it, then we will be missing an entry for LS1021A. > What's the status of that SoC because there is no board dts file? We > should not have .dtsi files in the kernel which don't get built. Hmm, I do not see any LS1021A SoC .dtsi in the tree. I suspect it's just a typo of LS1012A. @Leo, do we have a LS1021A SoC? Shawn
