On Thu, Aug 11, 2022 at 09:21:35AM +0300, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 11/08/2022 01:57, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 28, 2022 at 09:19:42AM -0600, Rob Herring wrote: > >> On Wed, 27 Jul 2022 18:42:30 +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > >>> Instead of listing directly properties typical for SPI peripherals, > >>> reference the spi-peripheral-props.yaml schema. This allows using all > >>> properties typical for SPI-connected devices, even these which device > >>> bindings author did not tried yet. > >>> > >>> Remove the spi-* properties which now come via spi-peripheral-props.yaml > >>> schema, except for the cases when device schema adds some constraints > >>> like maximum frequency. > >>> > >>> While changing additionalProperties->unevaluatedProperties, put it in > >>> typical place, just before example DTS.a > >>> > >>> The binding references also input.yaml and lists explicitly allowed > >>> properties, thus here reference only spi-peripheral-props.yaml for > >>> purpose of documenting the SPI slave device and bringing > >>> spi-max-frequency type validation. > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx> > >>> > >>> --- > >>> > >>> Technically, this depends on [1] merged to SPI tree, if we want to > >>> preserve existing behavior of not allowing SPI CPHA and CPOL in each of > >>> schemas in this patch. > > > > Could we merge this through SPI tree as well? > > > >>> > >>> If this patch comes independently via different tree, the SPI CPHA and > >>> CPOL will be allowed for brief period of time, before [1] is merged. > >>> This will not have negative impact, just DT schema checks will be > >>> loosened for that period. > >>> > >>> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20220722191539.90641-2-krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx/ > >>> --- > >>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/input/ariel-pwrbutton.yaml | 1 + > >>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > >>> > >> > >> Acked-by: Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > Acked-by: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > There is no dependency anymore (and actually that time it was not really > dependency), so you can take it freely for next cycle. Hm, it turns out I already applied it and even included in pull request for Linus. But for some reason my "applied" email was not bcc-ed to me and so I got terribly confused. -- Dmitry
