Hi Krzysztof,
On Sat, 2023-04-15 at 11:51 +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> Required properties should be listed in "required:" block. Since
> interrupts are already there, the dependency of interrupt-names on the
> interrupts can be simplified.
Maybe I'm not reading this right, but isn't the dependency stated in the binding
"interrupts requires interrupt-names to be present"? resource-names.txt
describes the reverse dependency ("interrupt-names is only meaningful with an
associated interrupts").
>
> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
In any case, I'm OK with a flattened requirements list:
Acked-by: Sander Vanheule <sander@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Best,
Sander
