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

[Sudeep Holla]

On Wed, Apr 10, 2024 at 06:56:37AM -0500, Rob Herring wrote:
> 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?
>

Sorry Ulf, this slipped through the cracks, will queue it.

> Please take via SCMI tree.
>

Sure

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

Thanks

-- 
Regards,
Sudeep