[PATCH v7 03/12] dt-bindings: mfd: Fix schema warnings for pwm-leds

[Jeff LaBundy]

Hi Alexander,

On Mon, Oct 05, 2020 at 10:34:42PM +0200, Alexander Dahl wrote:
> The node names for devices using the pwm-leds driver follow a certain
> naming scheme (now).  Parent node name is not enforced, but recommended
> by DT project.
> 
>   DTC     Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/iqs62x.example.dt.yaml
>   CHECK   Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/iqs62x.example.dt.yaml
> /home/alex/build/linux/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/iqs62x.example.dt.yaml: pwmleds: 'panel' does not match any of the regexes: '^led(-[0-9a-f]+)?$', 'pinctrl-[0-9]+'
>         From schema: /home/alex/src/linux/leds/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/leds/leds-pwm.yaml
> 
> Signed-off-by: Alexander Dahl <post at lespocky.de>
> ---
> 
> Notes:
>     v6 -> v7:
>       * added warning message to commit message (Krzysztof Kozlowski)
>     
>     v6:
>       * added this patch to series
> 
>  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/iqs62x.yaml | 5 +++--
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/iqs62x.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/iqs62x.yaml
> index 541b06d80e73..92dc48a8dfa7 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/iqs62x.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/iqs62x.yaml
> @@ -90,10 +90,11 @@ examples:
>              };
>      };
>  
> -    pwmleds {
> +    led-controller {
>              compatible = "pwm-leds";
>  
> -            panel {
> +            led-1 {
> +                    label = "panel";
>                      pwms = <&iqs620a_pwm 0 1000000>;
>                      max-brightness = <255>;
>              };
> -- 
> 2.20.1
> 

I like the consistency this brings. My only feedback is that in the other
examples I found (common.yaml and leds-gpio.yaml), the children count off
from 0 (e.g. led-0) instead of 1 as your series appears to.

That's not a huge deal; it simply seems more consistent to count from the
first index allowed by the regex (0). The patch is still fine, and so:

Acked-by: Jeff LaBundy <jeff at labundy.com>

Kind regards,
Jeff LaBundy