Hello Rob,
Hello Srini,
On 02.11.20 16:23, Ahmad Fatoum wrote:
>>> 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?
Did you have time to look at this?
>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------- 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 |
