On Mon, Mar 25, 2024 at 3:01 PM Kalle Valo <kvalo@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@xxxxxxxx> writes: > > > From: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > + > > +maintainers: > > + - Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@xxxxxxxxxx> > > IMHO it would be better to have just driver maintainers listed here. > Why? What's wrong with having the author of the bindings in the Cc list? > > +required: > > + - compatible > > + - reg > > + - vddaon-supply > > + - vddwlcx-supply > > + - vddwlmx-supply > > + - vddrfacmn-supply > > + - vddrfa0p8-supply > > + - vddrfa1p2-supply > > + - vddrfa1p8-supply > > + - vddpcie0p9-supply > > + - vddpcie1p8-supply > > Same comment here as in patch 4. There are also ath12k PCI devices which > don't need DT at all. I don't know if that should be reflected in the > bindings doc but I want to point out this. > But DT bindings don't apply to devices that don't have DT nodes. This isn't an issue at all. Bart
