On Thu 16 Sep 23:25 PDT 2021, Stephen Boyd wrote: > Quoting Rakesh Pillai (2021-09-16 09:55:52) > > @@ -78,6 +84,10 @@ properties: > > Phandle reference to a syscon representing TCSR followed by the > > three offsets within syscon for q6, modem and nc halt registers. > > > > + qcom,qmp: > > + $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/phandle > > + description: Reference to the AOSS side-channel message RAM. > > + > > qcom,smem-states: > > $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/phandle-array > > description: States used by the AP to signal the Hexagon core > > @@ -117,6 +127,33 @@ allOf: > > compatible: > > contains: > > enum: > > + - qcom,sc7280-wpss-pil > > + then: > > Honestly I find this if/else to be a huge tangle. Why not split the > binding so that each compatible is a different file? Then it is easier > to read and see what properties to set. > Further more, the way we express the non-PAS properties in the PAS node in the dtsi and then switch the compatible in the non-PAS devices means that we're causing validation errors. So we should explode this binding to get rid of the conditionals and to describe the "superset" of the PAS and non-PAS compatibles, for platforms where this is applicable. Regards, Bjorn > > + properties: > > + interrupts-extended: > > + maxItems: 6 > > + items: > > + - description: Watchdog interrupt > > + - description: Fatal interrupt > > + - description: Ready interrupt
