Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] regulator: Add bindings for TPS6287x

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 04/05/2023 17:08, Mårten Lindahl wrote:
> Hi Krzysztof!
> 
> On 5/4/23 11:34, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 04/05/2023 10:30, Mårten Lindahl wrote:
>>> Add bindings for the TPS62870/TPS62871/TPS62872/TPS62873 voltage
>>> regulators.
>>>
>> Use subject prefixes matching the subsystem (which you can get for
>> example with `git log --oneline -- DIRECTORY_OR_FILE` on the directory
>> your patch is touching).
>>
>> Just a hint - I in general ignore all the emails without dt-bindings prefix.
> Ok, I'll prefix it "dt-bindings: regulator:"

You got command to run, so run it.  This semi-automated response is made
longer for the purpose to help you, not to be quickly scrolled and
ignored. When you run it you will see the order is opposite, regulator
followed by dt-bindings.

You can apply such habit for other subsystems where maintainers also
expect certain prefixes.


>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Mårten Lindahl <marten.lindahl@xxxxxxxx>
>>> ---
>>>   .../devicetree/bindings/regulator/ti,tps62870.yaml | 62 ++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>   1 file changed, 62 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/regulator/ti,tps62870.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/regulator/ti,tps62870.yaml
>>> new file mode 100644
>>> index 000000000000..32f259f16314
>>> --- /dev/null
>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/regulator/ti,tps62870.yaml
>>> @@ -0,0 +1,62 @@
>>> +# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause)
>>> +%YAML 1.2
>>> +---
>>> +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/regulator/ti,tps62870.yaml#
>>> +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml#
>>> +
>>> +title: TI TPS62870/TPS62871/TPS62872/TPS62873 voltage regulator
>>> +
>>> +maintainers:
>>> +  - Mårten Lindahl <marten.lindahl@xxxxxxxx>
>>> +
>>> +properties:
>>> +  compatible:
>>> +    enum:
>>> +      - ti,tps62870
>>> +      - ti,tps62871
>>> +      - ti,tps62872
>>> +      - ti,tps62873
>>> +
>>> +  reg:
>>> +    maxItems: 1
>>> +
>>> +  regulators:
>>> +    type: object
>>> +
>>> +    properties:
>>> +      "vout":
>> Drop quotes.
>>
>> Why do you need entire "regulators" node for one regulator? Why do you
>> need child at first place. Drop it entirely.
> I will remove the regulators node. I think the vout node is needed to 
> get the of_get_regulator_init_data.

Hmmm, how other simple regulators deal with it? Like all the fixed ones
and few other one-regulator-devices?


Best regards,
Krzysztof