Hi Krzysztof,
On Montag, 26. September 2022 10:54:23 CEST Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 25/09/2022 18:18, Luca Weiss wrote:
> > The iadc node name is supposed to be just 'adc' and the compatible is
> > only supposed to be qcom,spmi-iadc according to the bindings.
> >
> > Adjust the node to match that.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Luca Weiss <luca@xxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >
> > arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-pm8941.dtsi | 4 ++--
> > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-pm8941.dtsi
> > b/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-pm8941.dtsi index 3c15eecf2f21..33517cccee01
> > 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-pm8941.dtsi
> > +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-pm8941.dtsi
> > @@ -131,8 +131,8 @@ adc-chan@48 {
> >
> > };
> >
> > };
> >
> > - pm8941_iadc: iadc@3600 {
> > - compatible = "qcom,pm8941-iadc",
"qcom,spmi-iadc";
> > + pm8941_iadc: adc@3600 {
> > + compatible = "qcom,spmi-iadc";
>
> I am not sure this is correct. Usually specific compatibles are encouraged.
I'm happy to change it the other way also.
But the sibling of this compatible, qcom,spmi-vadc also only has that single
compatible so it'd align it with that.
Let me know what you think.
Regards
Luca
>
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof
