Hi Geert-san, Thank you for your review! > From: Geert Uytterhoeven, Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2020 10:10 PM <snip> > > + interrupt-names: > > + minItems: 9 > > + maxItems: 17 > > + items: > > + - const: error > > + - pattern: "^ch([0-9]|1[0-5])$" > > + - pattern: "^ch([0-9]|1[0-5])$" > > + - pattern: "^ch([0-9]|1[0-5])$" > > + - pattern: "^ch([0-9]|1[0-5])$" > > + - pattern: "^ch([0-9]|1[0-5])$" > > + - pattern: "^ch([0-9]|1[0-5])$" > > + - pattern: "^ch([0-9]|1[0-5])$" > > + - pattern: "^ch([0-9]|1[0-5])$" > > + - pattern: "^ch([0-9]|1[0-5])$" > > + - pattern: "^ch([0-9]|1[0-5])$" > > + - pattern: "^ch([0-9]|1[0-5])$" > > + - pattern: "^ch([0-9]|1[0-5])$" > > + - pattern: "^ch([0-9]|1[0-5])$" > > + - pattern: "^ch([0-9]|1[0-5])$" > > + - pattern: "^ch([0-9]|1[0-5])$" > > + - pattern: "^ch([0-9]|1[0-5])$" > > Would it make sense to just put the actual names here? > > - const: error > - const: ch0 > - const: ch1 > [...] > - const: ch 15 Rob suggested using pattern on other patch: https://lkml.org/lkml/2020/2/19/720 So, I'm thinking using pattern is better. Best regards, Yoshihiro Shimoda
