RE: [PATCH 00/10] dt-bindings: mfd: Use generic power-controller schema

Hi Rob,

> Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/10] dt-bindings: mfd: Use generic power-
> controller schema
> 
> On Tue, Aug 04, 2026 at 10:16:35PM +0800, Peng Fan (OSS) wrote:
> > The generic power-controller.yaml schema has been added to
> > dt-schema[1], providing a common definition for the
> > `system-power-controller` boolean property. Convert MFD bindings
> that
> > locally define this property to instead reference the shared schema.
> >
> > The common change across all patches is:
> >  - Add a $ref to /schemas/power/power-controller.yaml#
> >  - Remove the local `system-power-controller` property definition
> >  - Switch from additionalProperties to unevaluatedProperties
> >
> > This is a pick of patches 2-11 from [2], rebased to linux-next/master,
> > no changes. Patch 1 (the generic power-controller.yaml schema itself)
> > is dropped since it has already been picked up by dt-schema.
> >
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Peng Fan <[email protected]>
> > ---
> > Peng Fan (10):
> >       dt-bindings: mfd: ene-kb[3]930: Use generic power-controller
> schema
> >       dt-bindings: mfd: ti,tps65910: Use generic power-controller
> schema
> >       dt-bindings: mfd: rockchip,rk8x: Use generic power-controller
> schema
> >       dt-bindings: mfd: ricoh,rn5t618: Use generic power-controller
> schema
> >       dt-bindings: mfd: netronix,ntxec: Use generic power-controller
> schema
> >       dt-bindings: mfd: ti,twl: Use generic power-controller schema
> >       dt-bindings: mfd: ti,tps6594: Use generic power-controller
> schema
> >       dt-bindings: mfd: rohm,bd71828-pmic: Use generic power-
> controller schema
> >       dt-bindings: mfd: fsl,mc13xxx: Use generic power-controller
> schema
> >       dt-bindings: mfd: samsung,s2mpg10-pmic: Use generic
> > power-controller schema
> 
> Can we hold off on this until at least the next cycle. 

Sure. 

This change
> effectively bumps the minimum version of dtschema. While power-
> controller.yaml is added to dtschema, it is not yet in a released version.
> I'm not all that sure these changes are much improvement given it is a
> single boolean.

If you prefer, I could drop the patchset.

Thanks,
Peng.

> 
> Rob