On 16/04/2023 21:00, Sander Vanheule wrote:
> 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").
The interrupts are already required by the binding, so the dependency,
which makes interrupts depending on presence of interrupt-names,
effectively was making the names required.
Best regards,
Krzysztof
