Re: (subset) [PATCH v2 1/2] dt-bindings: mfd: qcom,spmi-pmic: Drop unused labels from examples

On Mon, 02 Oct 2023 09:00:11 +0200, Luca Weiss wrote: > There's not much point in having unused labels in the binding example, > so drop them. > > This patch was originally motivated by ea25d61b448a ("arm64: dts: qcom: > Use plural _gpios node label for PMIC gpios") updating all dts files to >

Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] dt-bindings: mfd: qcom,spmi-pmic: Drop unused labels from examples

On 02/10/2023 09:00, Luca Weiss wrote: > There's not much point in having unused labels in the binding example, > so drop them. > > This patch was originally motivated by ea25d61b448a ("arm64: dts: qcom: > Use plural _gpios node label for PMIC gpios") updating all dts files to > use the plural

Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] dt-bindings: mfd: qcom,spmi-pmic: Drop unused labels from examples

On Mon, Oct 02, 2023 at 09:00:11AM +0200, Luca Weiss wrote: > There's not much point in having unused labels in the binding example, > so drop them. > > This patch was originally motivated by ea25d61b448a ("arm64: dts: qcom: > Use plural _gpios node label for PMIC gpios") updating all dts files

[PATCH v2 1/2] dt-bindings: mfd: qcom,spmi-pmic: Drop unused labels from examples

There's not much point in having unused labels in the binding example, so drop them. This patch was originally motivated by ea25d61b448a ("arm64: dts: qcom: Use plural _gpios node label for PMIC gpios") updating all dts files to use the plural _gpios label instead of the singular _gpio as label