Hi Krzysztof,
On Mon, Sep 19, 2022 at 6:08 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski
<krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On 19/09/2022 15:41, Sergio Paracuellos wrote:
> > Hi Krzysztof,
> >
> > On Mon, Sep 19, 2022 at 2:48 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski
> > <krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>
> >> On 19/09/2022 14:29, Sergio Paracuellos wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> else mips-hpt-frequency: false
> >>>>
> >>>>> +
> >>>>> +required:
> >>>>> + - compatible
> >>>>> +
> >>>>> +additionalProperties: true
> >>>>
> >>>> and this is why you did not notice errors...
> >>>
> >>> Current arch/mips/boot/dts folder dts files are a mess for cpu nodes,
> >>> so I set additionalProperties to true and only make required for
> >>> 'compatible'. What should be the correct approach?
> >>
> >> This is okay, but it caused you did not notice errors...
> >>
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> +
> >>>>> +examples:
> >>>>> + - |
> >>>>> + cpus {
> >>>>> + #size-cells = <0>;
> >>>>> + #address-cells = <1>;
> >>>>> +
> >>>>> + cpu@0 {
> >>>>> + device_type = "cpu";
> >>>>> + compatible = "mips,mips1004Kc";
> >>>>> + reg = <0>;
> >>>>> + };
> >>>>> +
> >>>>> + cpu@1 {
> >>>>> + device_type = "cpu";
> >>>>> + compatible = "mips,mips1004Kc";
> >>>>> + reg = <1>;
> >>>>> + };
> >>>>> + };
> >>>>> +
> >>>>> + - |
> >>>>> + // Example 2 (BMIPS CPU)
> >>>>> + cpus {
> >>>>> + #address-cells = <1>;
> >>>>> + #size-cells = <0>;
> >>>>> +
> >>>>> + mips-hpt-frequency = <150000000>;
> >>>>
> >>>> Does not match your bindings. Are you sure you tested the patches?
> >>>
> >>> Yes I did:
> >>>
> >>> $ make dt_binding_check
> >>> DT_SCHEMA_FILES=Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mips/cpus.yaml
> >>> LINT Documentation/devicetree/bindings
> >>> CHKDT Documentation/devicetree/bindings/processed-schema.json
> >>> SCHEMA Documentation/devicetree/bindings/processed-schema.json
> >>> DTEX Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mips/cpus.example.dts
> >>> DTC Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mips/cpus.example.dtb
> >>> ' CHECK Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mips/cpus.example.dtb
> >>>
> >>> Can you please point me to a sample of how to make required in a
> >>> parent node of cpu@X property 'mips-hpt-frequency' only for some
> >>> compatible strings inside the node? What can this be properly
> >>> expressed using schema??
> >>> I was looking and testing different things for a while without success at all.
> >>
> >> You either define new schema for /cpus node (and match by name, define
> >> children etc) or include it in schema for top-level properties. The
> >> first is tricky, because the cpus node does not have compatible (like
> >> nvidia,tegra194-ccplex.yaml).
Ok so if I am understanding correctly having two schemas is a way to go:
One for brcm,bmips-cpus.yaml (since there is no compatible, should
this be a valid name for this?) containing something like:
properties:
$nodename:
const: cpus
mips-hpt-frequency:
$ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/uint32
description: |
This is common to all CPUs in the system so it lives
under the "cpus" node.
additionalProperties: true
examples:
- |
cpus {
#address-cells = <1>;
#size-cells = <0>;
mips-hpt-frequency = <150000000>;
cpu@0 {
compatible = "brcm,bmips4350";
device_type = "cpu";
reg = <0>;
};
cpu@1 {
compatible = "brcm,bmips4350";
device_type = "cpu";
reg = <1>;
};
};
And the other as 'cpus.yaml' having:
properties:
compatible:
enum:
- brcm,bmips3300
- brcm,bmips4350
- brcm,bmips4380
- brcm,bmips5000
- brcm,bmips5200
- ingenic,xburst-mxu1.0
- ingenic,xburst-fpu1.0-mxu1.1
- ingenic,xburst-fpu2.0-mxu2.0
- loongson,gs264
- mips,m14Kc
- mips,mips4Kc
- mips,mips4KEc
- mips,mips24Kc
- mips,mips24KEc
- mips,mips74Kc
- mips,mips1004Kc
- mti,interaptiv
- mti,mips24KEc
- mti,mips14KEc
- mti,mips14Kc
reg:
maxItems: 1
required:
- compatible
additionalProperties: true
examples:
- |
cpus {
#size-cells = <0>;
#address-cells = <1>;
cpu@0 {
device_type = "cpu";
compatible = "mips,mips1004Kc";
reg = <0>;
};
cpu@1 {
device_type = "cpu";
compatible = "mips,mips1004Kc";
reg = <1>;
};
};
Should this be a valid approach?
Thanks,
Sergio Paracuellos
> >>
> >> The second should work, but then it's a bit cluttered (top-level mixed
> >> with cpus).
> >
> > I don't know if I am understanding you but maybe it is because my
> > explanation about the requirement was not good at all. So let me
> > explain a bit better.
> >
> > This is the normal way of definition of cpus for BMIPS:
>
> I know, I checked the DTS.
>
> >
> > cpus {
> > #address-cells = <1>;
> > #size-cells = <0>;
> >
> > mips-hpt-frequency = <150000000>;
> >
> > cpu@0 {
> > compatible = "brcm,bmips4350";
> > device_type = "cpu";
> > reg = <0>;
> > };
> >
> > cpu@1 {
> > compatible = "brcm,bmips4350";
> > device_type = "cpu";
> > reg = <1>;
> > };
> > };
> >
> > What I need to say in schema is that 'mips-hpt-frequency' must be only
> > present if cpu@0 and cpu@1 nodes contain a compatible matching
> > brcm,bmips*. In the same cpu@0 or cpu@1 node
> > the following below will be sufficient. How can I express the same but
> > referring that 'mips-hpt-frequency' must be on the parent node?
>
> As I said you had two ways. In your current patch, I think you cannot.
>
> > Because as it is below the validator complains because
> > 'mips-hpt-frequency'
> > is not present in cpu@0 and cpu@1 nodes:
> >
> > allOf:
> > - if:
> > properties:
> > compatible:
> > enum:
> > - brcm,bmips3300
> > - brcm,bmips4350
> > - brcm,bmips4380
> > - brcm,bmips5000
> > - brcm,bmips5200
> > then:
> > required:
> > - mips-hpt-frequency
> > else:
> > properties:
> > mips-hpt-frequency: false
> >
>
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof
