On 11/3/2021 9:29 AM, Rob Herring wrote:
On Wed, Nov 3, 2021 at 11:08 AM Jae Hyun Yoo
<jae.hyun.yoo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi Rob,
On 11/2/2021 6:20 PM, Rob Herring wrote:
On Tue, 02 Nov 2021 13:37:16 -0700, jae.hyun.yoo@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
From: Jae Hyun Yoo <jae.hyun.yoo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Add 'clocks' as a required property.
Signed-off-by: Jae Hyun Yoo <jae.hyun.yoo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
v1 -> v2:
Changes sinve v1:
- Added 'clocks' property into kcs-bmc bindings using
'aspeed,ast2400-kcs-bmc.yaml' because it's not merged into
'aspeed-lpc.yaml' yet. The bindings merging could be done using a
separate patch later.
.../devicetree/bindings/ipmi/aspeed,ast2400-kcs-bmc.yaml | 7 +++++++
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
Running 'make dtbs_check' with the schema in this patch gives the
following warnings. Consider if they are expected or the schema is
incorrect. These may not be new warnings.
Note that it is not yet a requirement to have 0 warnings for dtbs_check.
This will change in the future.
Full log is available here: https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/1549943
kcs@114: 'clocks' is a required property
arch/arm/boot/dts/aspeed-bmc-amd-ethanolx.dt.yaml
arch/arm/boot/dts/aspeed-bmc-bytedance-g220a.dt.yaml
arch/arm/boot/dts/aspeed-bmc-inspur-nf5280m6.dt.yaml
kcs@24: 'clocks' is a required property
arch/arm/boot/dts/aspeed-bmc-amd-ethanolx.dt.yaml
kcs@28: 'clocks' is a required property
arch/arm/boot/dts/aspeed-bmc-amd-ethanolx.dt.yaml
arch/arm/boot/dts/aspeed-bmc-facebook-elbert.dt.yaml
arch/arm/boot/dts/aspeed-bmc-facebook-tiogapass.dt.yaml
kcs@2c: 'clocks' is a required property
arch/arm/boot/dts/aspeed-bmc-amd-ethanolx.dt.yaml
arch/arm/boot/dts/aspeed-bmc-asrock-e3c246d4i.dt.yaml
arch/arm/boot/dts/aspeed-bmc-bytedance-g220a.dt.yaml
arch/arm/boot/dts/aspeed-bmc-facebook-elbert.dt.yaml
arch/arm/boot/dts/aspeed-bmc-facebook-tiogapass.dt.yaml
arch/arm/boot/dts/aspeed-bmc-inspur-nf5280m6.dt.yaml
#4/6 in this patch adds 'clocks' into aspeed-g5.dtsi and aspeed-g6.dtsi
as a default property and all above dts files include the dtsi file so
these warning shouldn't be seen. Is it a result after applying all
changes in this series or just after cherry picking #5/6 patch only?
Only patch 5 is applied.
I tested 'dtbs_check' before submitting this series I tested it again
and got the same good result like below.
Aren't the above warnings false positive? Or did I miss something?
What you missed is this is an ABI. You cannot make something required
that was not required before. If the driver follows the schema and
makes 'clocks' required, then old DTBs with a new kernel will break.
Okay. I got it clearly and understand that it could introduce a problem
in that case. Thanks for your clarification.
It's possible that 'clocks' was always required or that it never
worked without clocks, then this change is okay. Looking at this
patch, I have no way to know that. The commit message has to explain
that. A commit message needs to answer WHY are you making the change.
You don't really need WHAT the change is as anyone can read the diff.
Then what would be better? Would it be good enough if I add more detail
commit message including a note that dtb recompiling is required? Or,
should I change this series to treat the 'clocks' as an optional
property? Can you please share your thought?
Thanks,
Jae
Rob
