Am Donnerstag, 24. Februar 2022, 11:02:48 CET schrieb Lee Jones: > On Wed, 23 Feb 2022, Heiko Stuebner wrote: > > > Hi Lee, > > > > Am Mittwoch, 23. Februar 2022, 10:16:01 CET schrieb Lee Jones: > > > On Mon, 14 Feb 2022, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > > > > > > > Include generic pwm.yaml schema, which enforces PWM node naming. Keep > > > > the old name in bindings as deprecated. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > --- > > > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/google,cros-ec.yaml | 4 ++++ > > > > > > Acked-by: Lee Jones <lee.jones@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > what is your expectation regarding this patch? > > > > Are you planning to merge it or are you expecting this to go through > > some other tree? > > > > The binding-change here is backward-comaptible in that the old > > node-name is still in it, only marked as deprecated, so in theory > > this patch should be able to be applied on its own without > > causing defects. > > In an ideal world, it would be broken up and I would take the MFD > part. Is that possible or are there dependencies? That is also what Krzysztof had in mind - see his reply to patch4. Binding going through the MFD tree and soc maintainers applying the individual dts patches. As written the binding change is backward compatible, so no harm. I was just confused by the "Acked-by" and wanted to clarify how you see it ;-) Heiko
