On 15/08/23 02:24, Andrew Davis wrote: > On 8/14/23 2:26 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >> On 12/08/2023 00:49, Nishanth Menon wrote: >>> Hi Vignesh Raghavendra, >>> >>> On Sat, 12 Aug 2023 00:14:29 +0530, Vignesh Raghavendra wrote: >>>> This series adds basic support for AM62P family of SoCs and >>>> specifically >>>> AM62P5 variant. Also adds AM62P5-SK support with basic peripheral >>>> like UART. >>>> >>>> TRM at [0] and Schematics is at [1] >>>> >>>> [0]: https://www.ti.com/lit/pdf/spruj83 >>>> [1]: https://www.ti.com/lit/zip/sprr487 >>>> >>>> [...] >>> >>> Note: since the changes were trivial, I incorporated the cosmetic >>> fixup suggested by Andrew locally when I applied. I have also dropped >>> bootph property from board's reserved nodes inline with what we did >>> for j721s2[2]. Thanks for the bootlog. >>> >>> I have applied the following to branch ti-k3-dts-next on [1]. >>> Thank you! >>> >>> [1/3] dt-bindings: arm: ti: Add bindings for AM62P5 SoCs >>> commit: b57fc5cbdbdfd04d44697800a9d59aeb3be2f273 >>> [2/3] arm64: dts: ti: Introduce AM62P5 family of SoCs >>> commit: 29075cc09f43a024d962da66d2e4f9eb577713d0 >>> [3/3] arm64: dts: ti: Add support for the AM62P5 Starter Kit >>> commit: 935c4047d42e53a06ec768ddc495a44f6869209c >>> >> >> A bit too fast. simple-mfd *is not allowed* on its own. >> > We have the rule against ['syscon', 'simple-mfd'], which requires a 3rd > specific compatible, but it seems 'simple-mfd' is allowed in the same way > as "simple-bus" (not sure how or why, I would expect a `failed to match any > schema with compatible`, but I'm not getting that either?). > Indeed, I didn't see any warnings from dtbs_check so far > We can add something like simple-mfd.yaml for this to explicitly check that > the compatible has minItems: 2. > > But in this case these seem to be just a typo and we meant "simple-bus" > here, > then it got copy/pasted over our k3 tree. > I dont think "simple-bus" is enough due to presence to TI specific property (ti,sci-dev-id). So this will warrant a separate yaml bindings. I will work towards adding such a file. > So as Nishanth suggested, we can clean this up first thing next cycle, then > add a rule to prevent it from happening for anyone else again while we > are at it. > > Andrew > >> Best regards, >> Krzysztof >> -- Regards Vignesh
