Hi Tomi,
On 17/01/22 7:24 pm, Tom Rini wrote:
On Mon, Jan 17, 2022 at 12:22:52PM +0530, Aswath Govindraju wrote:
Hi Tom,
On 17/01/22 11:01 am, Aswath Govindraju wrote:
Hi Tom,
On 13/01/22 7:42 pm, Tom Rini wrote:
On Tue, Jan 11, 2022 at 01:25:26PM +0530, Aswath Govindraju wrote:
From: Nishanth Menon nm@ti.com
If there is an optional boot notification channel that an SoC uses separate from the rx path, use the same.
Signed-off-by: Nishanth Menon nm@ti.com
.../remoteproc/k3-system-controller.txt | 3 +++ drivers/remoteproc/k3_system_controller.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++++- 2 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
Binding docs are rst these days, so we should sync with upstream and then this property is already there, right?
I will create a followup patch to convert documentation to rst. Also, about the property, mbox-names property is already present but "boot_notify" is a newly added channel and not are required property. So, this was additionally added.
One more question regarding documentation, should it be changed to rst or yaml, as this is a device tree binding?
I mis-spoke, yeah. It should be yaml and pushed upstream first, then brought back here.
I am sorry, I have one more question. This above documentation file is not present in kernel documentation, so I did not understand how can this be pushed there first.
Also, as converting to yaml would be a different work. Wouldn't it be better to separate that work from this series?
Thanks, Aswath