On Wed, Jun 15, 2022 at 11:07:19PM +0200, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> Commit cc6111375cec ("ARM: drop efm32 platform") removed the platform,
> so no need to still carry the bindings.
>
> Signed-off-by: Wolfram Sang <wsa@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> .../devicetree/bindings/clock/efm32-clock.txt | 11 -----
> .../devicetree/bindings/i2c/i2c-efm32.txt | 33 --------------
> .../devicetree/bindings/serial/efm32-uart.txt | 20 ---------
> .../devicetree/bindings/spi/efm32-spi.txt | 39 -----------------
> include/dt-bindings/clock/efm32-cmu.h | 43 -------------------
> 5 files changed, 146 deletions(-)
> delete mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/efm32-clock.txt
> delete mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/i2c-efm32.txt
> delete mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/efm32-uart.txt
> delete mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/efm32-spi.txt
> delete mode 100644 include/dt-bindings/clock/efm32-cmu.h
I didn't do that back then wondering if the bindings are sensible to
keep even for removed arch (or more general drivers). In this case the
chip isn't old and unavailable, but just too small for sensible Linux
usage.
OTOH I'm not aware of any dtb usage on efm32.
No hard feelings here, if you consider it not useful to keep the binding
around, go on and remove them.
Best regards
Uwe
--
Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König |
Industrial Linux Solutions | https://www.pengutronix.de/ |
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
