[PATCH] dt-bindings: firmware: arm,scmi: Update examples for protocol at 13

[Rob Herring]

On Thu, Apr 04, 2024 at 12:52:08PM +0200, Ulf Hansson wrote:
> On Wed, 3 Apr 2024 at 15:53, Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla at arm.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Apr 03, 2024 at 01:11:06PM +0200, Ulf Hansson wrote:
> > > Recently we extended the binding for protocol at 13 to allow it to be modelled
> > > as a generic performance domain. In a way to promote using the new binding,
> > > let's update the examples.
> > >
> >
> > Does it make sense to keep one DVFS example with #clock-cells until we
> > mark it as deprecated ? Otherwise it may be confusing as the binding still
> > lists. Or leave some comment in the example or something, I am open for
> > suggestions.
> 
> I am certainly fine with either way!
> 
> However, if we intend to make #clock-cells deprecated down the road,
> maybe it's better to start avoiding the use of it already now. That
> said, what do you think of following up $subject patch with an update
> to Juno's dts(i) to move to #power-domains-cells too? That would mean
> we get a nice reference for how to use this too.
> 
> >
> > Other than that,
> >
> > Acked-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla at arm.com>
> 
> Are you picking this via your scmi tree, or which route is this going?

Please take via SCMI tree.

Acked-by: Rob Herring <robh at kernel.org>