From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: jic23@kernel.org (Jonathan Cameron) Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2017 10:34:22 +0000 Subject: [PATCH v1 2/7] dt-bindings: iio: rockchip-saradc: add support for rk3328 In-Reply-To: <8664375.8vdE6CQfX9@phil> References: <1489572237-6649-1-git-send-email-cl@rock-chips.com> <1489572237-6649-3-git-send-email-cl@rock-chips.com> <8664375.8vdE6CQfX9@phil> Message-ID: To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 16/03/17 08:28, Heiko Stuebner wrote: > Am Mittwoch, 15. M?rz 2017, 18:03:52 CET schrieb cl at rock-chips.com: >> From: Chen Liang >> >> The rk3328 saradc is the same as rk3399. >> >> Signed-off-by: Chen Liang >> --- >> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/adc/rockchip-saradc.txt | 1 + >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) >> >> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/adc/rockchip-saradc.txt >> b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/adc/rockchip-saradc.txt index >> 205593f..f81bc20 100644 >> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/adc/rockchip-saradc.txt >> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/adc/rockchip-saradc.txt >> @@ -5,6 +5,7 @@ Required properties: >> - "rockchip,saradc": for rk3188, rk3288 >> - "rockchip,rk3066-tsadc": for rk3036 >> - "rockchip,rk3399-saradc": for rk3399 >> + - "rockchip,rk3328-saradc", "rockchip,rk3399-saradc": for rk3328 > > not sure how iio people see that, but I would suggest keeping the order, so > put rk3328 above rk3399. In my case I'm not that fussed either way. Still if this list keeps growing I can see it would be better to keep it in numeric order! Jonathan > > Heiko > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-iio" in > the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html >