[PATCH v2] dt-bindings: nvmem: Use soc-nvmem node name instead of nvmem

[Michal Simek]

On 8/9/24 16:28, Conor Dooley wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 09, 2024 at 08:38:46AM +0200, Michal Simek wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 8/8/24 17:51, Conor Dooley wrote:
>>> On Thu, Aug 08, 2024 at 01:02:59PM +0200, Michal Simek wrote:
>>>> Based on commit d8764d347bd7 ("dt-bindings: firmware: xilinx: Describe
>>>> soc-nvmem subnode") soc-nvmem should be used instead of simple nvmem that's
>>>> why also update example to have it described correctly everywhere.
>>>>
>>>> Fixes: c7f99cd8fb6b ("dt-bindings: nvmem: Convert xlnx,zynqmp-nvmem.txt to yaml")
>>>> Signed-off-by: Michal Simek <michal.simek at amd.com>
>>>> Acked-by: Rob Herring (Arm) <robh at kernel.org>
>>>> ---
>>>>
>>>> Changes in v2:
>>>> - Fix sha1 in Fixes tag - reported by Stephen
>>>>
>>>> Adding comments from origin version
>>>> https://lore.kernel.org/r/42c21f3bcd75f821061d047730dbbcd40233e256.1716800023.git.michal.simek@amd.com
>>>>
>>>> Rob:
>>>>    This doesn't seem like an improvement. Is there another nvmem node at
>>>>    this level? I would fix the binding instead if not.
>>>>
>>>> Michal:
>>>> That name came from discussion with Conor.
>>>
>>> Did it? I don't recall that, only discussion about adding a "real"
>>> example to the binding and noting a typo in the commit message.
>>
>> Definitely you ack it and description was saying the reason for soc-nvmem name
>> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240131-portal-glazing-16fa36efb3cb@spud/
> 
> Yeah, to be clear I wasn't complaining about being name-dropped, just
> was pointing out that it wasn't my idea, just something I didn't object
> to :)

Thanks and cheers,
Michal