On Sun, 27 Aug 2023 at 15:00, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 27/08/2023 13:48, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: > > On Sun, 27 Aug 2023 at 14:12, Krzysztof Kozlowski > > <krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > >> On 27/08/2023 12:42, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: > >>> 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'. > >> > >> They are allowed. Why do you think they aren't? That's why I don't > >> understand what real problem is here. > > > > qcom-pm8xxx.yaml lists `interrupts' property under the `required' > > clause. So I can not simply replace it with `interrupts-extended' > > Since when? So again: The entire patch is not needed. Hmm, interesting. I'm pretty sure that I saw the issue, but now I can no longer reproduce it. Maybe I misinterpreted some other warning which I saw while this was WIP. I see that it is handled by the `fixup_interrupts` in dtschema itself. -- With best wishes Dmitry
