On Thu, Sep 16, 2021 at 11:09:16PM -0400, Oskar Senft wrote:
> Ok, I experimented with that and I think I'm starting to get an idea
> how the DT bindings YAML works.
>
> > > Yes, let's do that. I'd like us to keep the "sensors" subnode to have a clear
> > > association and differentiator to other sub-nodes such as "regulators".
> > > Open is if we can use "temperature-sensor@0" or if it would have to be
> > > a chip specific "ltd", but I think we can sort that out after suggesting
> > > an initial set of bindings to Rob.
>
> However, I found that when I use the name@x syntax, the schema
> validator also requires the use of a reg or ranges property. But then
> doing so requires to set the #address-cells and #size-cells
> properties, which - I think - makes things weird.
>
> So these two examples are options that validate:
> i2c {
> #address-cells = <1>;
> #size-cells = <0>;
>
> nct7802@28 {
> compatible = "nuvoton,nct7802";
> reg = <0x28>;
>
> temperature-sensors {
> ltd {
> status = "disabled";
> label = "mainboard temperature";
> };
>
> rtd1 {
> status = "okay";
> label = "inlet temperature";
> type = <4> /* thermistor */;
> };
> };
> };
> };
>
> or
>
> i2c {
> #address-cells = <1>;
> #size-cells = <0>;
>
> nct7802@28 {
> compatible = "nuvoton,nct7802";
> reg = <0x28>;
>
> temperature-sensors {
> #address-cells = <1>;
> #size-cells = <0>;
>
> sensor@0 {
> reg = <0>;
> status = "disabled";
> label = "mainboard temperature";
> };
>
> sensor@1 {
> reg = <1>;
> status = "okay";
> label = "inlet temperature";
> type = <4> /* thermistor */;
> };
> };
> };
> };
>
> In the second case we end up having to duplicate information, i.e.
> "sensor@1" and "reg = <1>". Also, I have not yet found a way to
> validate that the "@x" is identical to the "reg = <x>". I believe that
> this is just how it is in device trees, but I want to make sure this
> is what we want?
>
> Thoughts?
>
Comparing those two, I prefer the first option. Can you write that up
in a yaml file to present to Rob ? If he doesn't like it, we can still
suggest the second variant as an alternative.
Thanks,
Guenter
