On 16/03/17 08:28, Heiko Stuebner wrote:

Am Mittwoch, 15. M?rz 2017, 18:03:52 CET schrieb cl at rock-chips.com:

quoted

From: Chen Liang <redacted>

The rk3328 saradc is the same as rk3399.

Signed-off-by: Chen Liang <redacted>
---
 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/adc/rockchip-saradc.txt | 1 +
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)

diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/adc/rockchip-saradc.txt

b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/adc/rockchip-saradc.txt index
205593f..f81bc20 100644

--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/adc/rockchip-saradc.txt
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/adc/rockchip-saradc.txt

@@ -5,6 +5,7 @@ Required properties:
    - "rockchip,saradc": for rk3188, rk3288
    - "rockchip,rk3066-tsadc": for rk3036
    - "rockchip,rk3399-saradc": for rk3399
+   - "rockchip,rk3328-saradc", "rockchip,rk3399-saradc": for rk3328

not sure how iio people see that, but I would suggest keeping the order, so 
put rk3328 above rk3399.

In my case I'm not that fussed either way. Still if this list keeps growing
I can see it would be better to keep it in numeric order!

Jonathan

Heiko
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-iio" in
the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html