Hello Rob,
Hello Srini,
On 10/12/20 5:36 PM, Ahmad Fatoum wrote:
> On 5/12/20 4:18 PM, Rob Herring wrote:
[snip]
>> I think instead, nvmem cells should be contained within a partition.
>> The partition should then have a compatible to indicate it contains
>> nvmem cells.
>
> I thought I had understood what needs to be done, but now that I finally have time
> to do it, I see that this only solves the second issue "extending the NVMEM binding
> to nodes that already have other child nodes, e.g., MTD and its partitions".
>
> The first issue: "future extension of e.g. eeprom nodes by any child nodes other than
> nvmem cells" isn't solved by having a containing partition.
>
>
> My issue is that the bootloader fixes up a partitions { compatible = "fixed-partitions"; }
> child node into the kernel device tree. The NVMEM core driver tries to parse all eeprom child
> nodes as cells and will make the driver probe of the EEPROM fail, because it can't parse that
> fixed-partitions node as a nvmem cell.
>
> To allow for co-existence of NVMEM cells and other subnodes, would following patch be
> acceptable to you and Srini?
Gentle ping. Would the patch below be acceptable?
>
> ---------------------------------------- 8< --------------------------------------
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/nvmem/nvmem.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/nvmem/nvmem.yaml
> @@ -45,7 +45,15 @@ properties:
> patternProperties:
> "^.*@[0-9a-f]+$":
> type: object
> -
> + if:
> + not:
> + properties:
> + compatible:
> + then:
> + $ref: "#/definitions/nvmem-cell"
> +
> +definitions:
> + nvmem-cell:
> properties:
> reg:
> maxItems: 1
Cheers,
Ahmad
--
Pengutronix e.K. | |
Steuerwalder Str. 21 | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 |
