Krzysztof Kozlowski <[email protected]> 于2026年7月29日周三 16:05写道： > > On 29/07/2026 10:01, Jun Nie wrote: > > Krzysztof Kozlowski <[email protected]> 于2026年7月28日周二 04:23写道： > >> > >> On Mon, Jul 27, 2026 at 04:08:40PM +0800, Jun Nie wrote: > >>> Some panel support 2 reset gpio, such as Synaptics R63455. So modify the > >> > >> There is no such binding for R63455. > >> > >>> number constrain of gpio to 1 to avoid check failure. > >> > >> What check failure? Please paste actual warnings (but not fake ones). > >> > > It is a review warning from sashiko. > > - [Low] The `reset-gpios` property's `maxItems: 2` constraint > > conflicts with the strictly enforced `maxItems: 1` inherited from > > `panel-common.yaml`. > > I don't understand what comment from sashiko has something to do with > some check failure. > > Anyway, we do not create commits because of some review. We write them > because there is a reason related to code, products etc. > > > > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Jun Nie <[email protected]> > >>> --- > >>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/panel/panel-common.yaml | 2 +- > >>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > >>> > >>> diff --git > >>> a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/panel/panel-common.yaml > >>> b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/panel/panel-common.yaml > >>> index 087415753d606..7c450d2799808 100644 > >>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/panel/panel-common.yaml > >>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/panel/panel-common.yaml > >>> @@ -119,7 +119,7 @@ properties: > >>> confused with a backlight enable signal. > >>> > >>> reset-gpios: > >>> - maxItems: 1 > >>> + minItems: 1 > >> > >> I do not get why all bindings now get completely flexible number of > >> resets. I am pretty sure not all of them constrain that. It's rather > >> your task to check it and explain in commit msg. > >> > >> For example the second random I took to check (ILI7807S) does not > >> restrict, so you just made that binding accepting 1000 reset lines. Why? > > > > I just want to extend the maxItems from 1 to 2 for my case. Do you have > > any suggestion? Thanks! > > I understand what you wanted, but you did not do that. You changed the > property for every case. > So changing to this is OK? maxItems: 2
Regards, Jun
