On 26.08.24 21:59, Nishanth Menon wrote: > On 14:01-20240826, Jan Kiszka wrote: >> On 26.08.24 13:42, Nishanth Menon wrote: >>> On 13:31-20240826, Jan Kiszka wrote: >>>> On 24.08.24 19:58, Nishanth Menon wrote: >>>>> On 18:37-20240814, Jan Kiszka wrote: >>>>>> From: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@xxxxxxxxxxx> >>>>>> >>>>>> Expand bindings to cover both the MCU and the main usage of the AM654 >>>>>> system controller. >>>>>> >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@xxxxxxxxxxx> >>>>>> --- >>>>>> .../soc/ti/ti,am654-system-controller.yaml | 19 +++++++++++++++++++ >>>>>> 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+) >>>>>> >>>>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/ti/ti,am654-system-controller.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/ti/ti,am654-system-controller.yaml >>>>>> index e79803e586ca..cb9da3ec39a8 100644 >>>>>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/ti/ti,am654-system-controller.yaml >>>>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/ti/ti,am654-system-controller.yaml >>>>> >>>>> As per linux-next, this file does not exist? looks like you might need >>>>> to rebase on latest next? >>>>> >>>> >>>> "This goes on top of >>>> https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-arm-kernel/cover/20240518-dt-bindings-ti-soc-mfd-v1-0-b3952f104c9a@xxxxxxxxxx/"; >>>> >>>> Is that series obsolete by now? >>> >>> This dependency information would have been useful when provided under the >>> diffstat section of the representative patch. :( >>> >> >> Yeah, who reads cover letters? ;) Will try to do that next time. > > Looking at what we included in v6.11, looks like the above series from > krystoff will need to be re-thought through. > [1] makes the patches un-necessary to an extent by modelling the node as > a simple-bus - Looks like k3-am62-wakeup.dtsi was missed, but it should > be trivial enough fixup. Did you try applying the series on latest next? > it should not apply anymore (Doesn't apply on master either). > > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240628151518.40100-1-afd@xxxxxx/ > Krystoff's and my patches still apply on top of master and next. I don't mind via which patches we finally get to zero dtbs_check warnings, just that we get there. Jan -- Siemens AG, Technology Linux Expert Center
