The node names should be generic and SPI NOR dtschema expects "flash".

Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>
---
 arch/arm64/boot/dts/mediatek/mt8183-kukui.dtsi | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/mediatek/mt8183-kukui.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/mediatek/mt8183-kukui.dtsi
index 0f9480f91261..8d5bf73a9099 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/mediatek/mt8183-kukui.dtsi
+++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/mediatek/mt8183-kukui.dtsi
@@ -849,7 +849,7 @@ &spi1 {
 	mediatek,pad-select = <0>;
 	status = "okay";
 
-	w25q64dw: spi-flash@0 {
+	w25q64dw: flash@0 {
 		compatible = "winbond,w25q64dw", "jedec,spi-nor";
 		reg = <0>;
 		spi-max-frequency = <25000000>;
-- 
2.32.0

On Thu, 7 Apr 2022 16:21:43 +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> The node names should be generic and SPI NOR dtschema expects "flash".
> 
> 

Looks like no one wants to take this, so let me take care of it.

Applied, thanks!

[1/1] arm64: dts: mt8183-kukui: align SPI NOR node name with dtschema
      commit: 4e3ffebd69e0aada1ce6bf4bf832e14a3c4f50db

Best regards,
-- 
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>

On 20/04/2022 11:10, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Apr 2022 16:21:43 +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> The node names should be generic and SPI NOR dtschema expects "flash".
>>
>>
> 
> Looks like no one wants to take this, so let me take care of it.
> 

First thing would have been a ping on the patch, don't you think? Anyway as I 
said the last time, if you take DTS patches for mediatek, I'd need a stable 
branch I can merge so that we don't have any merge conflicts in the end.

Regards,
Matthias

> Applied, thanks!
> 
> [1/1] arm64: dts: mt8183-kukui: align SPI NOR node name with dtschema
>        commit: 4e3ffebd69e0aada1ce6bf4bf832e14a3c4f50db
> 
> Best regards,

On 20/04/2022 14:35, Matthias Brugger wrote:
> 
> 
> On 20/04/2022 11:10, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On Thu, 7 Apr 2022 16:21:43 +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>> The node names should be generic and SPI NOR dtschema expects "flash".
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Looks like no one wants to take this, so let me take care of it.
>>
> 
> First thing would have been a ping on the patch, don't you think? 

And what does it change? The operating-points clean up [1] was sent in
August last year, then in this April, and you responded only when I
wrote pick-up. The Google cros-ec clean up was sent in Feb and two weeks
later pinged [2].

Pinging and resending apparently does not help. It's okay, happens, we
are all extra busy and we all pretty often do it as part of
community/hobby/spare time.

> Anyway as I 
> said the last time, if you take DTS patches for mediatek

I don't want to take the patches for Mediatek. But I also don't want to
resend and ping each one of them because it did not work in the past.

> , I'd need a stable 
> branch I can merge so that we don't have any merge conflicts in the end.

Can you just pick the patch?


[1]
https://lore.kernel.org/all/?q=%22arm64%3A+dts%3A+mediatek%3A+align+operating-points+table+name+with+dtschema%22

[2]
https://lore.kernel.org/all/?q=%22arm64%3A+dts%3A+mt8183%3A+align+Google+CROS+EC+PWM+node+name+with+dtschema%22

Best regards,
Krzysztof

Hi Krzysztof,

On 21/04/2022 10:01, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 20/04/2022 14:35, Matthias Brugger wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 20/04/2022 11:10, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>> On Thu, 7 Apr 2022 16:21:43 +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>>> The node names should be generic and SPI NOR dtschema expects "flash".
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Looks like no one wants to take this, so let me take care of it.
>>>
>>
>> First thing would have been a ping on the patch, don't you think?
> 
> And what does it change? The operating-points clean up [1] was sent in
> August last year, then in this April, and you responded only when I
> wrote pick-up. The Google cros-ec clean up was sent in Feb and two weeks
> later pinged [2].
> 

That I answered to the pick-up is just plain coincidence that I had some time to 
look into the patches. Sorry for being unresponsive. I'm happy that you care 
about MediaTek patches. If you think there will more patches in this cycle or 
future cycles, we can also agree on you taking the patches and send me a pull 
request later. I only want to avoid any merge conflicts, that's all.

> Pinging and resending apparently does not help. It's okay, happens, we
> are all extra busy and we all pretty often do it as part of
> community/hobby/spare time.
> 
>> Anyway as I
>> said the last time, if you take DTS patches for mediatek
> 
> I don't want to take the patches for Mediatek. But I also don't want to
> resend and ping each one of them because it did not work in the past.
> 
>> , I'd need a stable
>> branch I can merge so that we don't have any merge conflicts in the end.
> 
> Can you just pick the patch?
> 

I pushed it to v5.18-next/dts64 [1]

Let me know if there are other patches that you want me to take.

Regards,
Matthias


[1] 
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/matthias.bgg/linux.git/log/?h=v5.18-next/dts64

> 
> [1]
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/?q=%22arm64%3A+dts%3A+mediatek%3A+align+operating-points+table+name+with+dtschema%22
> 
> [2]
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/?q=%22arm64%3A+dts%3A+mt8183%3A+align+Google+CROS+EC+PWM+node+name+with+dtschema%22
> 
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof

On 22/04/2022 11:13, Matthias Brugger wrote:
> 
> I pushed it to v5.18-next/dts64 [1]
> 
> Let me know if there are other patches that you want me to take.

Thanks! I dropped it from my tree.


Best regards,
Krzysztof