It shouldn't have been the case that it wasn't required. The kernel
devicetrees already specified it where compatible nodes were defined,
and u-boot pulls in the kernel devicetrees, so this should have minimal
practical impact.

Signed-off-by: Andrew Jeffery <andrew@codeconstruct.com.au>
---
 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/aspeed,sgpio.yaml | 1 +
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)

diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/aspeed,sgpio.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/aspeed,sgpio.yaml
index 02c02ef97565..433b50bd5484 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/aspeed,sgpio.yaml
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/aspeed,sgpio.yaml
@@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ required:
   - clocks
   - interrupts
   - interrupt-controller
+  - '#interrupt-cells'
   - gpio-controller
   - '#gpio-cells'
   - ngpios

-- 
2.39.2

On 29/05/2024 07:13, Andrew Jeffery wrote:
> It shouldn't have been the case that it wasn't required. The kernel
> devicetrees already specified it where compatible nodes were defined,
> and u-boot pulls in the kernel devicetrees, so this should have minimal
> practical impact.
> 

This should be squashed with previous patch.

Best regards,
Krzysztof

On Wed, 2024-05-29 at 09:28 +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 29/05/2024 07:13, Andrew Jeffery wrote:
> > It shouldn't have been the case that it wasn't required. The kernel
> > devicetrees already specified it where compatible nodes were defined,
> > and u-boot pulls in the kernel devicetrees, so this should have minimal
> > practical impact.
> > 
> 
> This should be squashed with previous patch.
> 

Sure, will do.

Andrew