From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S936629AbcHJSlO (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Aug 2016 14:41:14 -0400 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.136]:33396 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S936181AbcHJSlL (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Aug 2016 14:41:11 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <57AAF68D.7090707@nvidia.com> References: <1466160667-28451-1-git-send-email-ldewangan@nvidia.com> <1466160667-28451-3-git-send-email-ldewangan@nvidia.com> <20160620163947.GA27492@rob-hp-laptop> <5768E2AD.8070004@nvidia.com> <57725F64.4030903@nvidia.com> <57AAF68D.7090707@nvidia.com> From: Rob Herring Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2016 07:43:04 -0500 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 2/4] clk: Combine DT binding doc for max77686 and max77802 To: Laxman Dewangan Cc: Michael Turquette , Stephen Boyd , linux-clk , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Krzysztof Kozlowski , Javier Martinez Canillas Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 4:40 AM, Laxman Dewangan wrote: > Hi, > > On Tuesday 28 June 2016 04:58 PM, Laxman Dewangan wrote: >> >> Hi Rob, >> >> On Tuesday 21 June 2016 12:16 PM, Laxman Dewangan wrote: >>> >>> >>> On Monday 20 June 2016 10:09 PM, Rob Herring wrote: >>>> >>>> On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 04:21:05PM +0530, Laxman Dewangan wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> + >>>>> Following properties should be presend in main device node of the MFD >>>>> chip. >>>>> Required properties: >>>> >>>> I'd expect to see compatible strings updated... >>>> >>> >>> There is no separate compatible string for clock. The clock nodes is the >>> parent node only and the compatible described in the parent DT binding doc. >>> >>> >>> Do we also need to add same thing here? >> >> >> Are you fine with the above? As there is no compatible string for clock >> (clock does not have separate node), do I still need to add explicitly here? >> > > > Can you please help here to review? If required, I can rebase and re-send > the patches. It is fine. Acked-by: Rob Herring