On 12/03/2025 09:43, Varadarajan Narayanan wrote:
> Append the MHI register range to IPQ9574.
Why?
>
> Fixes: e0662dae178d ("dt-bindings: PCI: qcom: Document the IPQ9574 PCIe controller")
What is being fixed here?
> Signed-off-by: Varadarajan Narayanan <quic_varada@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> New patch introduced in this patchset. MHI range was missed in the
> initial post
> ---
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pci/qcom,pcie.yaml | 3 ++-
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pci/qcom,pcie.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pci/qcom,pcie.yaml
> index 8f628939209e..77e66ab8764f 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pci/qcom,pcie.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pci/qcom,pcie.yaml
> @@ -175,7 +175,7 @@ allOf:
> properties:
> reg:
> minItems: 5
> - maxItems: 5
> + maxItems: 6
Why qcom,pcie-ipq6018 gets mhi? Nothing in commit msg mentions ipq6018.
> reg-names:
> items:
> - const: dbi # DesignWare PCIe registers
> @@ -183,6 +183,7 @@ allOf:
> - const: atu # ATU address space
> - const: parf # Qualcomm specific registers
> - const: config # PCIe configuration space
> + - const: mhi # MHI registers
Never tested - you introduce new warnings. AGAIN.
Properties xxx and xxx-names must have always the same constraints.
Best regards,
Krzysztof
