On Thu, Aug 25, 2022 at 10:23 AM Jonas Gorski <jonas.gorski@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, 16 Aug 2022 at 20:39, Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > The Broadcom pinctrl bindings are incomplete for child nodes as they are > > missing 'unevaluatedProperties: false' to prevent unknown properties. > > Fixing this reveals many warnings including having grandchild nodes in some > > cases. > > > > Signed-off-by: Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > This recursive schema requires a fix not yet committed in dtschema. > > > > I'm looking for feedback on whether group->pins or group->groups is the > > right fix here. There's more warnings with this change in the gpio-sysctl > > bindings. > > The answer is "yes", though pins is probably the closest for most. > > bcm6318 has multiple field-per-pin registers, where each pin is > controlled separately, with more fields than available GPIOs, and the > pins outside the GPIO range controlling other functions, like > switching the second USB port between host and client mode. > > bcm6328/6362/6368/63268 have two registers. The first one enables an > alternative function for the first 32 GPIOs, with a 1:1 mapping of > bits to GPIO. The second one enables a function for whole, arbitrary > groups. These groups can overlap, and may also target pins outside the > first 32 GPIOs. The actual pins in use are not documented, and can > sometimes be guessed/inferred by the function names (e.g. "GPIO35"), > sometimes not ("NAND", "UTOPIA"). > > bcm6358 has only the groups register, which also includes non GPIO > related functions, like inversing the MII clocks for the integrated > macs. > > Not supported is bcm6348, which would be the only one where groups > would definitely make more sense: there are 5 groups of 8 GPIOs, where > each group can be set to a certain function (but not all functions are > valid for all groups). E.g. for PCI support, you would need to set the > fields to PCI for groups 0, 1 and 3 (and 2 and 5 could be set to a > different function). You can ignore this though, as bcm6348 is ancient > (doesn't even support ADSL2+). > > Hope that helps a bit. Only in determining that someone else needs to fix this. Please send me patches. Rob