On Wed, Sep 21 2022 at 11:45:41 AM +0200, AngeloGioacchino Del Regno
<angelogioacchino.delregno@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Il 21/09/22 11:30, yassine.oudjana@xxxxxxxxx ha scritto:
On Wed, Sep 21 2022 at 09:11:12 AM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski
<krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 20/09/2022 10:06, AngeloGioacchino Del Regno wrote:
Il 19/09/22 19:01, Yassine Oudjana ha scritto:
From: Yassine Oudjana <y.oudjana@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Documents for MT6779, MT6795 and MT6797 that currently exist
share
most properties, and each one has slightly differently worded
descriptions for those properties. Combine all three documents
into
one common document for all MT67xx SoC pin controllers, picking
a few
parts from each and accounting for differences such as items in
reg
and reg-names properties. Also document the MT6765 pin controller
which currently has a driver but no DT binding documentation. It
should
be possible to also include bindings for MT8183 and MT8188, but
these
have some additional properties that might complicate things a
bit,
so they are left alone for now.
Signed-off-by: Yassine Oudjana <y.oudjana@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
.../pinctrl/mediatek,mt6779-pinctrl.yaml | 207
------------------
.../pinctrl/mediatek,mt6797-pinctrl.yaml | 176
---------------
...6795.yaml => mediatek,mt67xx-pinctrl.yaml} | 181
+++++++++++----
Hello Yassine,
nice cleanup over here!
There's a catch though: as far as I know, wildcards are not
permitted... so you
should, at this point, merge all of these in
mediatek,mt6779-pinctrl.yaml instead.
Before jumping to that, though... Krzysztof, can you please
confirm (or deny)?
Wildcards are not allowed in compatibles. In filename wildcards or
family name could work if they are really going to match the
devices. I
have doubts here. 67xx is quite a lot of different devices, so I am
not
sure this will cover them all.
I would prefer one name (oldest SoC or lowest number).
Lowest number (and probably oldest too but not sure since mediatek
naming conventions are a bit weird) currently documented is mt6779,
but mt6765 gets documented in this patch and mt6735 (this one I
know for sure is older than the rest) in a following patch, so do I
just stick with mt6779 or do I change it in the following patches
documenting mt6765 and mt6735?
I see the sequence as:
1. You merge mediatek,mt6797-pinctrl.yaml into
mediatek,mt6779-pinctrl.yaml; then
And mediatek,pinctrl-mt6795 gets merged here too I assume?
2. Adding MT6765 documentation to mediatek,mt6779-pinctrl.yaml; then
3. Adding support for MT6735, documentation goes again to
6779-pinctrl.
This means that you're working with mediatek,mt6779-pinctrl.yaml :-)
P.S.: That was also a suggestion about how to split things per-commit!
Cheers,
Angelo
Thanks,
Yassine
Best regards,
Krzysztof
