[PATCH v6 2/5] dt-bindings: regulator: Add bindings for Silicon Mitus SM5703 regulators

[PATCH v6 2/5] dt-bindings: regulator: Add bindings for Silicon Mitus SM5703 regulators

[Markuss Broks]

This patch adds device-tree bindings for regulators on Silicon Mitus
SM5703 MFD.

Signed-off-by: Markuss Broks <markuss.broks@gmail.com>
---
 .../siliconmitus,sm5703-regulator.yaml        | 49 +++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 49 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/regulator/siliconmitus,sm5703-regulator.yaml

diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/regulator/siliconmitus,sm5703-regulator.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/regulator/siliconmitus,sm5703-regulator.yaml
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..9d84117530ca
--- /dev/null
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/regulator/siliconmitus,sm5703-regulator.yaml
@@ -0,0 +1,49 @@
+# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause
+%YAML 1.2
+---
+$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/regulator/siliconmitus,sm5703-regulator.yaml#
+$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml#
+
+title: Silicon Mitus SM5703 multi function device regulators
+
+maintainers:
+  - Markuss Broks <markuss.broks@gmail.com>
+
+description: |
+  SM5703 regulators node should be a sub node of the SM5703 MFD node. See SM5703 MFD
+  bindings at Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/siliconmitus,sm5703.yaml
+  Regulator nodes should be named as USBLDO_<number>, BUCK, VBUS, LDO_<number>.
+  The definition for each of these nodes is defined using the standard
+  binding for regulators at Documentation/devicetree/bindings/regulator/regulator.txt.
+
+properties:
+  buck:
+    type: object
+    $ref: regulator.yaml#
+    unevaluatedProperties: false
+    description:
+      Properties for the BUCK regulator.
+
+  vbus:
+    type: object
+    $ref: regulator.yaml#
+    unevaluatedProperties: false
+    description:
+      Properties for the VBUS regulator.
+
+patternProperties:
+  "^ldo[1-3]$":
+    type: object
+    $ref: regulator.yaml#
+    unevaluatedProperties: false
+    description:
+      Properties for single LDO regulator.
+
+  "^usbldo[1-2]$":
+    type: object
+    $ref: regulator.yaml#
+    unevaluatedProperties: false
+    description:
+      Properties for a single USBLDO regulator.
+
+additionalProperties: false
-- 
2.35.1

Re: [PATCH v6 2/5] dt-bindings: regulator: Add bindings for Silicon Mitus SM5703 regulators

[Mark Brown]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 505 bytes --]

On Fri, Apr 29, 2022 at 02:39:25PM +0300, Markuss Broks wrote:
> This patch adds device-tree bindings for regulators on Silicon Mitus
> SM5703 MFD.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Markuss Broks <markuss.broks@gmail.com>
> ---
>  .../siliconmitus,sm5703-regulator.yaml        | 49 +++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 49 insertions(+)
>  create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/regulator/siliconmitus,sm5703-regulator.yaml

As Rob said please send an incremental patch with any fixes needed.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH v6 2/5] dt-bindings: regulator: Add bindings for Silicon Mitus SM5703 regulators

[Markuss Broks]

Hi Mark,

On 4/29/22 14:48, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 29, 2022 at 02:39:25PM +0300, Markuss Broks wrote:
>> This patch adds device-tree bindings for regulators on Silicon Mitus
>> SM5703 MFD.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Markuss Broks <markuss.broks@gmail.com>
>> ---
>>   .../siliconmitus,sm5703-regulator.yaml        | 49 +++++++++++++++++++
>>   1 file changed, 49 insertions(+)
>>   create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/regulator/siliconmitus,sm5703-regulator.yaml
> As Rob said please send an incremental patch with any fixes needed.
I'm sorry, I didn't understand it correctly. Does "incremental patch" 
mean I should send a separate follow-up patch with those fixes?
- Markuss

Re: [PATCH v6 2/5] dt-bindings: regulator: Add bindings for Silicon Mitus SM5703 regulators

[Mark Brown]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 491 bytes --]

On Fri, Apr 29, 2022 at 02:51:03PM +0300, Markuss Broks wrote:
> On 4/29/22 14:48, Mark Brown wrote:

> > As Rob said please send an incremental patch with any fixes needed.

> I'm sorry, I didn't understand it correctly. Does "incremental patch" mean I
> should send a separate follow-up patch with those fixes?

Yes.  It means on top of what's already applied.

Please also don't label patches that aren't part of a patch series as
though they were in a series, it just creates confusion.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]