On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 6:43 AM, Andreas Färber <afaerber@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> Am 25.06.2014 12:47, schrieb Mark Rutland:
>> On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 06:27:04PM +0100, Doug Anderson wrote:
>>> Andreas,
>>>
>>> On Sun, Jun 22, 2014 at 6:21 PM, Andreas Färber <afaerber@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>> It's vsys-l{1,2}-supply, not vsys_l{1,2}-supply.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Andreas Färber <afaerber@xxxxxxx>
>>>> ---
>>>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/regulator/tps65090.txt | 4 ++--
>>>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/regulator/tps65090.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/regulator/tps65090.txt
>>>> index 34098023..ca69f5e 100644
>>>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/regulator/tps65090.txt
>>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/regulator/tps65090.txt
>>>> @@ -45,8 +45,8 @@ Example:
>>>> infet5-supply = <&some_reg>;
>>>> infet6-supply = <&some_reg>;
>>>> infet7-supply = <&some_reg>;
>>>> - vsys_l1-supply = <&some_reg>;
>>>> - vsys_l2-supply = <&some_reg>;
>>>> + vsys-l1-supply = <&some_reg>;
>>>> + vsys-l2-supply = <&some_reg>;
>>>
>>> Your change matches the code and all existing device trees in the
>>> Linux kernel.
>>
>> Could this fact please be mentioned in the commit message?
>
> Yes, I admit the commit message could've been clearer in stating that
> only the example is modified, not the actual specification. What about:
>
> "Specification and existing device trees use vsys-l{1,2}-supply, not
> vsys_l{1,2}-supply. Fix the example to match the specification."
>
> Maybe also "... typos in example" in the subject.
>
> Let me know whether I should send a v2 or let maintainers fix it up.
Please send v2.
Rob
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
