Hi Krzysztof, miquel.raynal@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote on Tue, 13 Jun 2023 13:43:50 +0200: > Hi Krzysztof, > > krzk@xxxxxxxxxx wrote on Sat, 10 Jun 2023 11:27:55 +0200: > > > On 06/06/2023 19:52, Miquel Raynal wrote: > > > As discussed with Krzysztof and Chris, it seems like each NAND > > > controller binding should actually restrain the properties allowed in > > > the NAND chip node with its own "unevaluatedProperties: false". This > > > only works if we reference a yaml schema which contains all the possible > > > properties *in the NAND chip node*. Indeed, the NAND controller yaml > > > schema contains properties for the NAND chip which are not evaluated > > > with this construction. > > > > > > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/a23dd485-a3d9-e31f-be3e-0ab293fcfc4a@xxxxxxxxxx/ > > > > Please rebase on latest kernel. This is some very old tree if you CC > > this address. > > Sorry for the trouble, it was a hardcoded address on my side. I've > updated the address to > > Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@xxxxxxxxxx> > > The series is based on v6.4-rc1. Against what branch/tag do you want it > to be rebased? When I asked this question I forgot I usually apply mtd bindings in my own tree :) I usually do it after receiving at least one R-by on the whole series, but here as I'm the author I would just like to get confirmation from you Krzysztof that I can go ahead (or if you prefer to take it, or maybe want to give this another look later). Thanks, Miquèl
