On 13/03/2022 18:09, Marek Vasut wrote: > On 3/13/22 16:47, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > > Hi, > > [...] > >>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/bridge/nxp,ldb.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/bridge/nxp,ldb.yaml >>> new file mode 100644 >>> index 0000000000000..a05dd05547836 >>> --- /dev/null >>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/bridge/nxp,ldb.yaml >>> @@ -0,0 +1,99 @@ >>> +# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause) >>> +%YAML 1.2 >>> +--- >>> +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/display/bridge/nxp,ldb.yaml# >> >> In title, description and commit msg you point this is specific to >> i.MX8M, so maybe reflect it in the file name as well. > > That's how it is so far, however NXP does recycle their IPs quite a bit > so I don't want to encode the SoC type into the bindings file name. I do > expect them to re-use this bridge somewhere else sooner rather than later. > > [...] > > The rest is fixed. > > [...] > >>> +examples: >>> + - | >>> + #include <dt-bindings/clock/imx8mp-clock.h> >>> + >>> + lvds-ldb { >> >> Generic node name, so "bridge" or "display-bridge" >> >>> + #address-cells = <0>; >>> + #size-cells = <0>; >> >> Why do you need address and size cells? This will complain if you test >> your bindings with proper compatible. > > Because the subnodes of this bridge have no dimension, so address/size > cells = 0. > > I don't understand the second part about "proper compatible", can you > elaborate ? You have wrong compatible in example and in bindings, so you do not see the error of address/size cells. They are also not required in your example, since you do not have unit address. Otherwise your lvds-ldb node would be wrong (see its address/size cells). If you supply address-cells you should see a W=1 warning: #address-cells/#size-cells without "ranges" or child "reg" property Best regards, Krzysztof
