On Fri, 14 Oct 2022 15:51:04 -0500, Rob Herring wrote:
> There's no reason to have "status" properties in examples. "okay" is the
> default, and "disabled" turns off some schema checks ('required'
> specifically).
>
> A meta-schema check for this is pending, so hopefully the last time to
> fix the
On Fri, Oct 14, 2022 at 03:51:04PM -0500, Rob Herring wrote:
> There's no reason to have "status" properties in examples. "okay" is the
> default, and "disabled" turns off some schema checks ('required'
> specifically).
>
> A meta-schema check for this is pending, so hopefully the last time to
> f
On 14/10/2022 at 22:51, Rob Herring wrote:
There's no reason to have "status" properties in examples. "okay" is the
default, and "disabled" turns off some schema checks ('required'
specifically).
A meta-schema check for this is pending, so hopefully the last time to
fix these.
Fix the indentati
On 14-10-22, 15:51, Rob Herring wrote:
> There's no reason to have "status" properties in examples. "okay" is the
> default, and "disabled" turns off some schema checks ('required'
> specifically).
>
> A meta-schema check for this is pending, so hopefully the last time to
> fix these.
>
> Fix the
On Fri, 14 Oct 2022 15:51:04 -0500
Rob Herring wrote:
> There's no reason to have "status" properties in examples. "okay" is the
> default, and "disabled" turns off some schema checks ('required'
> specifically).
>
> A meta-schema check for this is pending, so hopefully the last time to
> fix th
On 14/10/2022 16:51, Rob Herring wrote:
> There's no reason to have "status" properties in examples. "okay" is the
> default, and "disabled" turns off some schema checks ('required'
> specifically).
>
> A meta-schema check for this is pending, so hopefully the last time to
> fix these.
>
> Fix th
There's no reason to have "status" properties in examples. "okay" is the
default, and "disabled" turns off some schema checks ('required'
specifically).
A meta-schema check for this is pending, so hopefully the last time to
fix these.
Fix the indentation in intel,phy-thunderbay-emmc while we're h
On Tue, 20 Jul 2021 11:20:25 -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
> There's no reason to have "status" properties in examples. "okay" is the
> default, and "disabled" turns off some schema checks ('required'
> specifically).
>
> Enabling qca,ar71xx causes a warning, so let's fix the node names:
>
> Document
On Tue, Jul 20, 2021 at 7:20 PM Rob Herring wrote:
> There's no reason to have "status" properties in examples. "okay" is the
> default, and "disabled" turns off some schema checks ('required'
> specifically).
All of mine are mistakes anyway.
Reviewed-by: Linus Walleij
Thanks for fixing this u
On Wed, Jul 21, 2021 at 2:33 AM Philipp Zabel wrote:
>
> Hi Rob,
>
> On Tue, 2021-07-20 at 11:20 -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
> > There's no reason to have "status" properties in examples. "okay" is the
> > default, and "disabled" turns off some schema checks ('required'
> > specifically).
>
> Is thi
On Tue, Jul 20, 2021 at 11:20:25AM -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
> There's no reason to have "status" properties in examples. "okay" is the
> default, and "disabled" turns off some schema checks ('required'
> specifically).
>
> Enabling qca,ar71xx causes a warning, so let's fix the node names:
>
> Do
Hi Rob,
On Tue, 2021-07-20 at 11:20 -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
> There's no reason to have "status" properties in examples. "okay" is the
> default, and "disabled" turns off some schema checks ('required'
> specifically).
Is this documented somewhere? If not, should it be? (Maybe in writing-
schem
On Tue Jul 20, 2021 at 6:20 PM WEST, Rob Herring wrote:
> There's no reason to have "status" properties in examples. "okay" is the
> default, and "disabled" turns off some schema checks ('required'
> specifically).
>
> Enabling qca,ar71xx causes a warning, so let's fix the node names:
>
> Document
On Tue, Jul 20, 2021 at 11:20:25AM -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
> There's no reason to have "status" properties in examples. "okay" is the
> default, and "disabled" turns off some schema checks ('required'
> specifically).
Acked-by: Mark Brown
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
On 20/07/2021 11:20:25-0600, Rob Herring wrote:
> There's no reason to have "status" properties in examples. "okay" is the
> default, and "disabled" turns off some schema checks ('required'
> specifically).
>
> Enabling qca,ar71xx causes a warning, so let's fix the node names:
>
> Documentation/d
Hi Rob,
Thank you for the patch.
On Tue, Jul 20, 2021 at 11:20:25AM -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
> There's no reason to have "status" properties in examples. "okay" is the
> default, and "disabled" turns off some schema checks ('required'
> specifically).
>
> Enabling qca,ar71xx causes a warning, s
Hi Rob,
On Tue, Jul 20, 2021 at 11:20:25AM -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
> There's no reason to have "status" properties in examples. "okay" is the
> default, and "disabled" turns off some schema checks ('required'
> specifically).
>
> Enabling qca,ar71xx causes a warning, so let's fix the node names
Em Tue, 20 Jul 2021 11:20:25 -0600
Rob Herring escreveu:
> There's no reason to have "status" properties in examples. "okay" is the
> default, and "disabled" turns off some schema checks ('required'
> specifically).
>
> Enabling qca,ar71xx causes a warning, so let's fix the node names:
>
> Docu
There's no reason to have "status" properties in examples. "okay" is the
default, and "disabled" turns off some schema checks ('required'
specifically).
Enabling qca,ar71xx causes a warning, so let's fix the node names:
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/qca,ar71xx.example.dt.yaml: phy@3:
'#p
19 matches
Mail list logo
