On Fri, 16 Jun 2023 at 11:47, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 16/06/2023 18:23, Jassi Brar wrote: > > On Fri, 16 Jun 2023 at 05:15, Krzysztof Kozlowski > > <krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > >> On 16/06/2023 05:58, jaswinder.singh@xxxxxxxxxx wrote: > >>> From: Jassi Brar <jaswinder.singh@xxxxxxxxxx> > >>> > >>> Socionext's DeveloperBox is based on the SC2A11B SoC (Synquacer). > >>> Specify bindings for the platform and boards based on that. > >> > >> A nit, subject: drop second/last, redundant "bindings". The > >> "dt-bindings" prefix is already stating that these are bindings. > >> > > I can remove it, but I see many mentions like "Fix bindings for" "Add > > binding for" etc in the subject line. > > Can we fix them as well? > ?? > > > >> > >> Binding without it's user is usually useless. Where is the user? > >> > > It is required for SystemReady-2.0 certification. > > For what? If there is no user, it is not required for SR. We don't > document compatibles for something which does not exist in the projects. > The dts/dtsi for synquacer will be added later. I am sure you are aware that there are countless bindings without actual use in any dts/dtsi. When exactly did it become mandatory to have dts/dtsi for the bindings to be merged upstream? -j
