On Mon, Jun 05, 2023 at 02:33:58AM -0600, Rob Herring wrote: > On Mon, 05 Jun 2023 09:08:22 +0200, Stephan Gerhold wrote: > > Use the new top-level rpm-proc node instead of having a dummy top-level > > /smd node that only contains the RPM but not other remote processors. > > > > Signed-off-by: Stephan Gerhold <stephan@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/qcom/qcom,smd-rpm.yaml | 6 +++--- > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > > > My bot found errors running 'make DT_CHECKER_FLAGS=-m dt_binding_check' > on your patch (DT_CHECKER_FLAGS is new in v5.13): > > yamllint warnings/errors: > > dtschema/dtc warnings/errors: > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/qcom/qcom,smd-rpm.example.dtb: /example-0/remoteproc-rpm: failed to match any schema with compatible: ['qcom,msm8916-rpm-proc', 'qcom,rpm-proc'] > Huh? The schema that matches this compatible is in the previous patch. :) Perhaps this error is related to the dt_binding_check problem on the patch before (which is caused by applying the patches to the wrong base branch). Before sending this series I verified that there are no dt_binding_check and dtbs_check warnings or errors when applied to the correct branch. Thanks, Stephan
