On Thu, 2019-12-19 at 14:36 +0000, Lee Jones wrote: > On Thu, 19 Dec 2019, Vaittinen, Matti wrote: > > > Hello Mark, Lee, Rob > > > > I just noticed we have a dependency here. This binding is referring > > to > > regulator binding - which was applied by Mark and is thus missing > > from > > the series. What's the best way forward? > > > > On Thu, 2019-12-19 at 11:46 +0200, Matti Vaittinen wrote: > > > ROHM BD71828 Power management IC integrates 7 buck converters, 7 > > > LDOs, > > > a real-time clock (RTC), 3 GPO/regulator control pins, HALL input > > > and a 32.768 kHz clock gate. > > > > > > Document the dt bindings drivers are using. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Matti Vaittinen <matti.vaittinen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > > > > > > Reviewed-by: Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > --- > > > > > > No changes since v6 > > > > //snip > > > > > + regulators: > > > + $ref: ../regulator/rohm,bd71828-regulator.yaml > > > > This file is missing from the series and is applied to Mark's tree. > > Shouldn't matter. I guess they're all heading for he same release. > Ok. Thanks for clarification. I was asking this because Rob asked me to reorder the patches a few versions ago so that the dt_binding_check Make target would not be broken between commits. He asked me to submit the regulator and LED bindings first and MFD (which refers to those) only after them. Thus I was wondering if the final merge order of MFD and regulator trees is such that it can result the breakage Rob hoped to avoid. But I am more than glad if the series can go in like this :) Thanks again for all the help guys :) Br, Matti
