On 5/4/23 17:11, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
On 04/05/2023 17:08, Mårten Lindahl wrote:
Hi Krzysztof!
On 5/4/23 11:34, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
On 04/05/2023 10:30, Mårten Lindahl wrote:
Add bindings for the TPS62870/TPS62871/TPS62872/TPS62873 voltage
regulators.
Use subject prefixes matching the subsystem (which you can get for
example with `git log --oneline -- DIRECTORY_OR_FILE` on the directory
your patch is touching).
Just a hint - I in general ignore all the emails without dt-bindings prefix.
Ok, I'll prefix it "dt-bindings: regulator:"
You got command to run, so run it. This semi-automated response is made
longer for the purpose to help you, not to be quickly scrolled and
ignored. When you run it you will see the order is opposite, regulator
followed by dt-bindings.
You can apply such habit for other subsystems where maintainers also
expect certain prefixes.
Hi! Sorry, I did run the command and followed the latest commit I could
see (1ba7dfb905b3) as the result is mixed with prefixes.
But I will of course do as you request: "regulator: dt-bindings: ".
Signed-off-by: Mårten Lindahl <marten.lindahl@xxxxxxxx>
---
.../devicetree/bindings/regulator/ti,tps62870.yaml | 62 ++++++++++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 62 insertions(+)
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/regulator/ti,tps62870.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/regulator/ti,tps62870.yaml
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..32f259f16314
--- /dev/null
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/regulator/ti,tps62870.yaml
@@ -0,0 +1,62 @@
+# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause)
+%YAML 1.2
+---
+$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/regulator/ti,tps62870.yaml#
+$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml#
+
+title: TI TPS62870/TPS62871/TPS62872/TPS62873 voltage regulator
+
+maintainers:
+ - Mårten Lindahl <marten.lindahl@xxxxxxxx>
+
+properties:
+ compatible:
+ enum:
+ - ti,tps62870
+ - ti,tps62871
+ - ti,tps62872
+ - ti,tps62873
+
+ reg:
+ maxItems: 1
+
+ regulators:
+ type: object
+
+ properties:
+ "vout":
Drop quotes.
Why do you need entire "regulators" node for one regulator? Why do you
need child at first place. Drop it entirely.
I will remove the regulators node. I think the vout node is needed to
get the of_get_regulator_init_data.
Hmmm, how other simple regulators deal with it? Like all the fixed ones
and few other one-regulator-devices?
Ok, I added of_get_regulator_init_data to the driver probe and then it
works fine. I'll drop the child node.
Thanks!
Kind regards
Mårten
Best regards,
Krzysztof
