On 7/29/2021 9:49 PM, Doug Anderson wrote:
Hi, On Thu, Jul 29, 2021 at 5:01 AM Rajendra Nayak <rnayak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:qfprom devices on some SoCs need to vote on the performance state of a power-domain, so add the power-domains optional property to the bindings Signed-off-by: Rajendra Nayak <rnayak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> --- Documentation/devicetree/bindings/nvmem/qcom,qfprom.yaml | 3 +++ 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/nvmem/qcom,qfprom.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/nvmem/qcom,qfprom.yaml index 861b205..a498a08 100644 --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/nvmem/qcom,qfprom.yaml +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/nvmem/qcom,qfprom.yaml @@ -51,6 +51,9 @@ properties: vcc-supply: description: Our power supply. + power-domains: + description: A phandle to a power domain node. +I'm trying to channel my inner Rob here by saying that this description doesn't add anything and this should just be:
Thanks, I trust the inner Rob in you :), so I'll drop the description and repost.
power-domains: maxItems: 1 Here's an example of Rob saying this: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-devicetree/20210712151322.GA1931925@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ Other than that, feel free to add my "Reviewed-by" tag. -Doug
-- QUALCOMM INDIA, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation
