[PATCH] dt-bindings: clock: stm32mp1: adapt example for "st,stm32mp1-rcc-secure"

[Rob Herring]

On Tue, May 10, 2022 at 06:44:19PM +0200, Alexandre TORGUE wrote:
> Hi Rob
> 
> On 5/10/22 16:57, Rob Herring wrote:
> > On Tue, May 10, 2022 at 09:47:05AM +0200, Alexandre TORGUE wrote:
> > > Hi Rob
> > > 
> > > On 5/9/22 21:16, Rob Herring wrote:
> > > > On Mon, 09 May 2022 15:46:58 +0200, Alexandre Torgue wrote:
> > > > > For "st,stm32mp1-rcc-secure" schema, clocks and clock-names entries are now
> > > > > required properties.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Alexandre Torgue <alexandre.torgue at foss.st.com>
> > > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > My bot found errors running 'make DT_CHECKER_FLAGS=-m dt_binding_check'
> > > > on your patch (DT_CHECKER_FLAGS is new in v5.13):
> > > > 
> > > > yamllint warnings/errors:
> > > > 
> > > > dtschema/dtc warnings/errors:
> > > > Error: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/st,stm32mp1-rcc.example.dts:27.33-34 syntax error
> > > > FATAL ERROR: Unable to parse input tree
> > > > make[1]: *** [scripts/Makefile.lib:364: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/st,stm32mp1-rcc.example.dtb] Error 1
> > > > make[1]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs....
> > > > make: *** [Makefile:1401: dt_binding_check] Error 2
> > > > 
> > > > doc reference errors (make refcheckdocs):
> > > > 
> > > > See https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/
> > > > 
> > > > This check can fail if there are any dependencies. The base for a patch
> > > > series is generally the most recent rc1.
> > > > 
> > > > If you already ran 'make dt_binding_check' and didn't see the above
> > > > error(s), then make sure 'yamllint' is installed and dt-schema is up to
> > > > date:
> > > > 
> > > > pip3 install dtschema --upgrade
> > > > 
> > > > Please check and re-submit.
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > I just updated dtschema and yamllint seems to be well installed. I don't see
> > > the see above. I wrote this patch on top of my stm32-next tree. Do I have to
> > > send it directly to arm-soc in order to be merged on top of my latest
> > > pull-request ?
> > 
> > That appears to be header related AFAICT. Maybe you have header changes
> > in your tree. The issue this is fixing is in your tree, so it should be
> > applied there.
> 
> Ah yes! CK_SCMIxxx have changed in my tree (merged in arm-soc tree) and this
> patch is done on top of this change. So has to be applied in arm-soc.
> So I just have to send it directly to Arnd and arm-soc ?

If you don't have a fixes branch for them (or one that will be pulled 
soonish), then yes.

Rob