On Wed, Feb 3, 2021 at 6:47 PM Damien Le Moal <Damien.LeMoal@xxxxxxx> wrote:
On Wed, 2021-02-03 at 14:41 -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
On Wed, Feb 3, 2021 at 6:52 AM Damien Le Moal <Damien.LeMoal@xxxxxxx> wrote:
On Tue, 2021-02-02 at 13:02 -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
On Tue, Feb 2, 2021 at 4:36 AM Damien Le Moal <damien.lemoal@xxxxxxx> wrote:
The sifive gpio IP block supports up to 32 GPIOs. Reflect that in the
interrupts property description and maxItems. Also add the standard
ngpios property to describe the number of GPIOs available on the
implementation.
Also add the "canaan,k210-gpiohs" compatible string to indicate the use
of this gpio controller in the Canaan Kendryte K210 SoC. If this
compatible string is used, do not define the clocks property as
required as the K210 SoC does not have a software controllable clock
for the Sifive gpio IP block.
Cc: Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Signed-off-by: Damien Le Moal <damien.lemoal@xxxxxxx>
---
.../devicetree/bindings/gpio/sifive,gpio.yaml | 21 ++++++++++++++++---
1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/sifive,gpio.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/sifive,gpio.yaml
index ab22056f8b44..2cef18ca737c 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/sifive,gpio.yaml
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/sifive,gpio.yaml
@@ -16,6 +16,7 @@ properties:
- enum:
- sifive,fu540-c000-gpio
- sifive,fu740-c000-gpio
+ - canaan,k210-gpiohs
- const: sifive,gpio0
reg:
@@ -23,9 +24,9 @@ properties:
interrupts:
description:
- interrupt mapping one per GPIO. Maximum 16 GPIOs.
+ interrupt mapping one per GPIO. Maximum 32 GPIOs.
minItems: 1
- maxItems: 16
+ maxItems: 32
interrupt-controller: true
@@ -38,6 +39,10 @@ properties:
"#gpio-cells":
const: 2
+ ngpios:
+ minimum: 1
+ maximum: 32
What's the default as obviously drivers already assume something.
Does a driver actually need to know this? For example, does the
register stride change or something?
Please don't add it if the only purpose is error check your DT (IOW,
if it just checks the max cell value in gpios phandles).
If I remove that, make dtbs_check complains. Looking at othe gpio controller
bindings, they all have it. So isn't it better to be consistent, and avoid make
dtbs_check errors ?
That would mean you are already using 'ngpios' and it is undocumented
(for this binding). If already in use and possibly having users then
that changes things, but that's not what the commit msg says.
Not *all* gpio controllers have ngpios. It's a good number, but
probably more than need it though. If we wanted it everywhere, there
would be a schema enforcing that.
If I remove the minimum and maximum lines, I get this error:
I never said remove minimum/maximum. The suggestion is either add
'default: 16' or remove 'ngpios' entirely.
./Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/sifive,gpio.yaml:42:10: [error] empty
value in block mapping (empty-values)
CHKDT Documentation/devicetree/bindings/processed-schema-examples.json
/home/damien/Projects/RISCV/linux/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/sifive
,gpio.yaml: properties:ngpios: None is not of type 'object', 'boolean'
SCHEMA Documentation/devicetree/bindings/processed-schema-examples.json
/home/damien/Projects/RISCV/linux/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/sifive
,gpio.yaml: ignoring, error in schema: properties: ngpios
warning: no schema found in file:
./Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/sifive,gpio.yaml
ngpios: true
or
ngpios: {}
Are the minimum valid values for a key. (Though not what should be done here.)
If I remove the ngpios property entirely, then I get a hit on the device tree:
CHECK arch/riscv/boot/dts/canaan/sipeed_maix_bit.dt.yaml
/linux/arch/riscv/boot/dts/canaan/sipeed_maix_bit.dt.yaml:
gpio-controller@38001000: 'ngpios' does not match any of the regexes: 'pinctrl-
[0-9]+'
From schema:
/home/damien/Projects/RISCV/linux/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/sifive
,gpio.yaml
That's not upstream, right? Then fix it.
Now, If I change the property definition to this:
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/sifive,gpio.yaml
b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/sifive,gpio.yaml
index 2cef18ca737c..5c7865180383 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/sifive,gpio.yaml
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/sifive,gpio.yaml
@@ -40,8 +40,11 @@ properties:
const: 2
ngpios:
- minimum: 1
- maximum: 32
+ $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/uint32
+ description:
+ The number of GPIO pins implemented by the controller.
+ It is 16 for the SiFive SoCs and 32 for the Canaan K210 SoC.
+
gpio-controller: true
Then all is OK.
Which option should I go for here ? If we want to avoid a dtbs_check error, as
far as I can see, we can:
1) Remove the ngpios property and remove its use from the DTS, which is not
nice in my opinion
Again, it depends if there are users depending on it. A user being a
GPIO driver somewhere, not a DTS file. The GPIO driver in the kernel
doesn't need it. So u-boot? BSD?
