On Tue, Dec 07, 2021 at 09:47:38AM +0100, Rafał Miłecki wrote: > On 06.12.2021 23:50, Rob Herring wrote: > >On Thu, Dec 2, 2021 at 12:32 AM Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > >>From: Rafał Miłecki <rafal@xxxxxxxxxx> > >> > >>Also fix some examples to avoid warnings like: > >>brcm,ns-pinmux.example.dt.yaml: pin-controller@1800c1c0: $nodename:0: 'pin-controller@1800c1c0' does not match '^pinctrl|pinmux@[0-9a-f]+$' > > > >I think you missed some. linux-next now has these warnings: > > Oops, sorry, I think I didn't test MFD bindings *after* modifying > pinctrl bindings. > > > >/builds/robherring/linux-dt/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/cirrus,madera.example.dt.yaml: > >codec@1a: $nodename:0: 'codec@1a' does not match > >'^(pinctrl|pinmux)(@[0-9a-f]+)?$' > > From schema: /builds/robherring/linux-dt/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/cirrus,madera.yaml > > I'm not sure how to deal with this one. If you take a look at > cirrus,madera.yaml it seems to be some complex MFD that is a sound > device with pin controller and regulator. > > I'm not sure: is using pinctrl@ node for that hardware is a correct > choice? Yeah historically there has been some contention around how to implement MFD devices, the Madera devices have a single node for the whole chip, rather than a sub-node for each driver. In many ways this does make sense since DT should describe the hardware and hardware wise this is a single chip, the fact linux breaks it down into separate drivers is really a linux specific implementation. Although the Lochnagar stuff from your other patch was steered in the direction of a sub-node for each driver during review. But either way the Madera binding is a bit old to be majorly changing at this point, and does have quite a few out of tree users. Not really sure how to fix this one either, the name of codec for the node is really correct as that is what the node is. Thanks, Charles
