I haven't received anything arguing with this so my answer is still no.
Also, this patch changes the lines introduced with b2f471a26721
("staging: mt7621-dts: make use of new 'mt7621-clk'").
Arınç
On 29.07.2023 17:08, Arınç ÜNAL wrote:
On 29.07.2023 14:04, Rafał Miłecki wrote:
From: Rafał Miłecki <rafal@xxxxxxxxxx>
Use order as specified in the binding (first "ethif" then "fe").
This fixes:
arch/mips/boot/dts/ralink/mt7621-tplink-hc220-g5-v1.dtb:
ethernet@1e100000: clock-names:0: 'ethif' was expected
From schema:
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/mediatek,net.yaml
arch/mips/boot/dts/ralink/mt7621-tplink-hc220-g5-v1.dtb:
ethernet@1e100000: clock-names:1: 'fe' was expected
From schema:
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/mediatek,net.yaml
Fixes: 7a6ee0bbab25 ("mips: dts: ralink: add MT7621 SoC")
Signed-off-by: Rafał Miłecki <rafal@xxxxxxxxxx>
I'm not sure if I should agree with this patch. The relevant parts of
the schema for mediatek,mt7621-eth were added way later than the
existing bindings on mt7621.dtsi. Why don't we address this on the
schema along with a bunch of other issues the patch for
mediatek,mt7621-eth brought?
Arınç
