Re: [PATCH 1/3] dt-bindings: mmc: Add Sparx5 SDHCI controller bindings

[Lars Povlsen <lars.povlsen@microchip.com>]

Rob Herring writes:

> On Wed, 13 May 2020 15:31:20 +0200, Lars Povlsen wrote:
>> The Sparx5 SDHCI controller is based on the Designware controller IP.
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Lars Povlsen <lars.povlsen@microchip.com>
>> ---
>>  .../mmc/microchip,dw-sparx5-sdhci.yaml        | 57 +++++++++++++++++++
>>  1 file changed, 57 insertions(+)
>>  create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mmc/microchip,dw-sparx5-sdhci.yaml
>>
>
>
> My bot found errors running 'make dt_binding_check' on your patch:
>
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mmc/microchip,dw-sparx5-sdhci.example.dts:20:18: fatal error: dt-bindings/clock/microchip,sparx5.h: No such file or directory
>          #include <dt-bindings/clock/microchip,sparx5.h>
>                   ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> compilation terminated.
> scripts/Makefile.lib:312: recipe for target 'Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mmc/microchip,dw-sparx5-sdhci.example.dt.yaml' failed
> make[1]: *** [Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mmc/microchip,dw-sparx5-sdhci.example.dt.yaml] Error 1
> make[1]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs....
> Makefile:1300: recipe for target 'dt_binding_check' failed
> make: *** [dt_binding_check] Error 2
>
> See https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/1289290
>

Rob,

The header file is added with the "parent" SoC series for Sparx5, which
was submitted separately to the SoC list.

Should I rewrite the example to avoid using the (normal) header file, or
can you add the header file?

I have verified the YAML pass dt_binding_check with the header file.

> If you already ran 'make dt_binding_check' and didn't see the above
> error(s), then make sure dt-schema is up to date:
>
> pip3 install git+https://github.com/devicetree-org/dt-schema.git@master --upgrade
>
> Please check and re-submit.

-- 
Lars Povlsen,
Microchip