Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] dt-bindings: mfd: qcom,spmi-pmic: Add pm8916 vm-bms and lbc

[Nikita Travkin]

Rob Herring писал(а) 23.10.2023 22:40:
> On Mon, 23 Oct 2023 11:20:32 +0500, Nikita Travkin wrote:
>> PM8916 (and probably some other similar pmics) have hardware blocks for
>> battery monitoring and charging. Add patterns for respecive nodes so the
>> devicetree for those blocks can be validated properly.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Nikita Travkin <nikita@xxxxxxx>
>> ---
>>  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/qcom,spmi-pmic.yaml | 6 ++++++
>>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
>>
> 
> My bot found errors running 'make DT_CHECKER_FLAGS=-m dt_binding_check'
> on your patch (DT_CHECKER_FLAGS is new in v5.13):
> 
> yamllint warnings/errors:
> 
> dtschema/dtc warnings/errors:
> /builds/robherring/dt-review-ci/linux/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/qcom,spmi-pmic.yaml:
> Error in referenced schema matching $id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/power/supply/qcom,pm8916-bms-vm.yaml
> 
> doc reference errors (make refcheckdocs):
> 
> See https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/devicetree-bindings/patch/20231023-pm8916-dtsi-bms-lbc-v2-1-343e3dbf423e@xxxxxxx
> 
> The base for the series is generally the latest rc1. A different dependency
> should be noted in *this* patch.
> 

Somehow I missed the memo and thought it tracks -next...

This patch depends on 7f590e3831 and 5cee843d56 in linux-next.git
They were applied in [1].

I'm wondering if the bot just bails out when the "depend" is present
or there is some more sophisticated logic to suggest the base to it?

Sorry for the inconvenience
Nikita

[1] https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230915-pm8916-bms-lbc-v3-0-f30881e951a0@xxxxxxx/