Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: clock: Require #reset-cells in sdm845-videocc

2018-11-30 Thread Stephen Boyd
Quoting Douglas Anderson (2018-11-27 11:24:43) > The #reset-cells was listed as optional in the bindings for > qcom,sdm845-videocc. There's no reason for it to be optional. As per > Stephen [1]: > > > We should update the binding to make it a required property. It > > doesn't make any sense why

Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: clock: Require #reset-cells in sdm845-videocc

2018-11-30 Thread Stephen Boyd
Quoting Douglas Anderson (2018-11-27 11:24:43) > The #reset-cells was listed as optional in the bindings for > qcom,sdm845-videocc. There's no reason for it to be optional. As per > Stephen [1]: > > > We should update the binding to make it a required property. It > > doesn't make any sense why

[PATCH] dt-bindings: clock: Require #reset-cells in sdm845-videocc

2018-11-27 Thread Douglas Anderson
The #reset-cells was listed as optional in the bindings for qcom,sdm845-videocc. There's no reason for it to be optional. As per Stephen [1]: > We should update the binding to make it a required property. It > doesn't make any sense why that property would be optional given > that the hardware

[PATCH] dt-bindings: clock: Require #reset-cells in sdm845-videocc

2018-11-27 Thread Douglas Anderson
The #reset-cells was listed as optional in the bindings for qcom,sdm845-videocc. There's no reason for it to be optional. As per Stephen [1]: > We should update the binding to make it a required property. It > doesn't make any sense why that property would be optional given > that the hardware