On Sun, 27 Aug 2023 at 11:35, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 27/08/2023 02:58, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: > > Allow using interrupts-extended, which is a preferred form of interrupts > > specification compared to the interrupt-parrent + interrupts pair. > > > > Signed-off-by: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@xxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/qcom-pm8xxx.yaml | 10 +++++++++- > > 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/qcom-pm8xxx.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/qcom-pm8xxx.yaml > > index 7fe3875a5996..33d9615e63c8 100644 > > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/qcom-pm8xxx.yaml > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/qcom-pm8xxx.yaml > > @@ -37,6 +37,9 @@ properties: > > interrupts: > > maxItems: 1 > > > > + interrupts-extended: > > + maxItems: 1 > > The entire patch is not needed. At least should not be needed. What > problem are you trying to solve here? The main problem is the next chunk, which (currently) explicitly requires `interrupts' property. My goal is to allow `interrupts-extended' in addition to `interrupts'. -- With best wishes Dmitry
