On Thu, Feb 16, 2023 at 11:03:39AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 16/02/2023 10:57, ChiYuan Huang wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 16, 2023 at 10:12:15AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > >> On 15/02/2023 03:00, cy_huang@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > >>> From: ChiYuan Huang <cy_huang@xxxxxxxxxxx> > >>> > >>> Add the binding document for Richtek RT5739. > >> > >> Subject: drop second/last, redundant "bindings for". The "dt-bindings" > >> prefix is already stating that these are bindings. > >> > > Then, refine it to "dt-bindings: regulator: Add Richtek RT5739 document" > > I propose also to drop "document" - it is also redundant. Can bindings > be something else than document? > Yes, you'r right. > > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: ChiYuan Huang <cy_huang@xxxxxxxxxxx> > >>> --- > >>> .../bindings/regulator/richtek,rt5739.yaml | 80 ++++++++++++++++++++++ > >>> 1 file changed, 80 insertions(+) > >>> create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/regulator/richtek,rt5739.yaml > >>> > >>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/regulator/richtek,rt5739.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/regulator/richtek,rt5739.yaml > >>> new file mode 100644 > >>> index 00000000..7dc4f78 > >>> --- /dev/null > >>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/regulator/richtek,rt5739.yaml > >>> @@ -0,0 +1,80 @@ > >>> +# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause > >>> +%YAML 1.2 > >>> +--- > >>> +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/regulator/richtek,rt5739.yaml# > >>> +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml# > >>> + > >>> +title: Richtek RT5739 2.4MHz 3.5A Step-Down Converter > >>> + > >>> +maintainers: > >>> + - ChiYuan Huang <cy_huang@xxxxxxxxxxx> > >>> + > >>> +description: | > >>> + The RT5739 is a step-down switching voltage regulator that delivers a > >>> + digitally programmable output from an input voltage supply of 2.5V to 5.5V. > >>> + The output voltage is programmed through an I2C interface capable of > >>> + operating up to 3.4MHz. > >>> + > >>> + Using a proprietary architecture with synchronous rectification, the RT5739 > >>> + is capable of delivering 3.5A continuously at over 80% efficiency, > >>> + maintaining that efficiency at load current as low as 10mA. The regulator > >>> + operates at a normal fixed frequency of 2.4MHz, which reduces the value of > >>> + the external components. > >> > >> Can we drop the marketing from kernel? Last part of sentence is not > >> related to this submission at all. The internal frequency also looks > >> unrelated to the topic... > >> > > Okay, too much marketing text. I'll shorten it and simply describe the function or > > voltage range only. > >>> Additional output capacitance can be added to > >>> + improve regulation during load transients without affecting stability. > >>> + > >>> +allOf: > >>> + - $ref: regulator.yaml# > >>> + > >>> +properties: > >>> + compatible: > >>> + enum: > >>> + - richtek,rt5739 > >>> + > >>> + reg: > >>> + maxItems: 1 > >>> + > >>> + enable-gpios: > >>> + maxItems: 1 > >>> + > >>> + richtek,vsel-active-high: > >>> + description: | > >>> + If property is present, use the 'VSEL1' register group for buck control. > >>> + Else, use the 'VSEL0' register group. This depends on external hardware > >>> + 'VSEL' pin connecton. > >>> + type: boolean > >>> + > >>> + regulator-allowed-modes: > >>> + description: | > >>> + buck allowed operating mode > >>> + 0: Auto PFM/PWM mode > >>> + 1: Forced PWM mode > >>> + maxItems: 2 > >>> + items: > >>> + enum: [0, 1] > >> > >> So you always require two items? Thus I wonder what's the point of > >> having it in DT? To skip the property entirely if none of the modes are > >> allowed? > >> > > Not always need two. So does it mean no need to describe the 'maxItems' and 'Items'. > > Your minItems is 2, so you always need two. If you accept one, the add > minItems: 1. > https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.2-rc8/source/drivers/regulator/of_regulator.c#L198 It seems no need to limit the maxItems. Regulator core will call 'of_map_mode' to check the value. Even the value is repeat. And for minItems, 'regulator.yaml' already said it's uint32-array. Must be lager than zero, right? So how about just keep 'items' and remove the 'maxItems'? > > > Best regards, > Krzysztof >
