Hi Krzysztof,
Could you please reply to this email?
(Not for me, but for everyone)
Best regards,
--
FUKAUMI Naoki
Radxa Computer (Shenzhen) Co., Ltd.
On 12/17/24 10:11, FUKAUMI Naoki wrote:
On 12/16/24 22:38, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
On 16/12/2024 12:30, FUKAUMI Naoki wrote:
Use consistent name with other regulators. No functional change.
Fixes: 3ddf5cdb77e6 ("arm64: dts: rockchip: add Radxa ROCK 5C")
Signed-off-by: FUKAUMI Naoki <naoki@xxxxxxxxx>
---
Changes in v5:
- Reword commit message
Changes in v4:
- reword commit message
Changes in v3:
- none
Changes in v2:
- new
---
arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3588s-rock-5c.dts | 6 +++---
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3588s-rock-5c.dts b/arch/
arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3588s-rock-5c.dts
index 85589d1a6d3b..61d75ab503b2 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3588s-rock-5c.dts
+++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3588s-rock-5c.dts
@@ -76,13 +76,13 @@ pwm-fan {
pwms = <&pwm3 0 60000 0>;
};
- pcie2x1l2_3v3: regulator-pcie2x1l2-3v3 {
+ vcc3v3_pcie2x1l2: regulator-vcc3v3_pcie2x1l2 {
No, neither explained, nor correct. See DTS coding style.
Please use name for all fixed regulators which matches current format
recommendation: 'regulator-[0-9]v[0-9]'
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/
tree/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/regulator/fixed-regulator.yaml?
h=v6.11-rc1#n46
'regulator-[0-9]v[0-9]' is preferred, but 'regulator-[0-9a-z-]+' is also
permitted, right?
i.e. regulator-vcc3v3_pcie2x1l2 should be regulator-vcc3v3-pcie2x1l2
Or, should we revert below patch and use 'regulator-[0-9]v[0-9]'?
https://lore.kernel.org/
all/0ae40493-93e9-40cd-9ca9-990ae064f21a@xxxxxxxxx/
Is 'regulator-0v0' valid?
Is 'regulator-12v0' invalid?
How should we handle multiple 1v8/3v3/5v0 regulators?
Are examples in fixed-regulator.yaml valid?
'regulator-name' should be '[0-9]v[0-9]' even if there is same name?
Best regards,
--
FUKAUMI Naoki
Radxa Computer (Shenzhen) Co., Ltd.
Best regards,
Krzysztof
