On 12/06/2023 10:52, Serge Semin wrote: > On Mon, Jun 12, 2023 at 10:39:57AM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >> On 12/06/2023 10:35, Serge Semin wrote: >>> On Mon, Jun 12, 2023 at 10:24:06AM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>>> On 08/06/2023 18:22, Sebastian Reichel wrote: >>>>> This adds Rockchip RK3588 AHCI binding. In order to narrow down the >>>>> allowed clocks without bloating the generic binding, the description >>>>> of Rockchip's AHCI controllers has been moved to its own file. >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Sebastian Reichel <sebastian.reichel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>>>> --- >>>> >>>> ... >>>> >>>>> + >>>>> +properties: >>>>> + compatible: >>>>> + items: >>>>> + - enum: >>>>> + - rockchip,rk3568-dwc-ahci >>>>> + - rockchip,rk3588-dwc-ahci >>>>> + - const: snps,dwc-ahci >>>>> + >>>>> + ports-implemented: >>>>> + const: 1 >>>>> + >>>>> +patternProperties: >>>>> + "^sata-port@[0-9a-e]$": >>>>> + $ref: /schemas/ata/snps,dwc-ahci-common.yaml#/$defs/dwc-ahci-port >>>>> + >>>>> + unevaluatedProperties: false >>>> >>> >>>> You should be able to skip this patternProperties entirely, because it >>>> comes from dwc-ahci-common -> ahci-common schema. Did you try the patch >>>> without it? >>> > >>> Please see my message about this. The "sata-port@[0-9a-e]$" sub-node >>> bindings could be updated with the "reg" property constraint which, >>> based on the "ports-implemented" property value, most likely is >>> supposed to be always set to const: 1. >> >> Then anyway the pattern is wrong as it should be @1 always. > > * I miscalculated a bit, it should have been zero but in general > the pattern-property is indeed redundant. > > As a conclusion the change should look like this: > > +properties: > + compatible: > + items: > + - enum: > + - rockchip,rk3568-dwc-ahci > + - rockchip,rk3588-dwc-ahci > + - const: snps,dwc-ahci > + > + ports-implemented: > + const: 1 > + > + "sata-port@0": > + $ref: /schemas/ata/snps,dwc-ahci-common.yaml#/$defs/dwc-ahci-port > + > + properties: > + reg: > + const: 0 > + > + unevaluatedProperties: false > + > + ... > > Right? Code is correct but as I said - probably meaningless. All other ports are also accepted via referenced schema. You would need to disallow other ports or switch to additionalProperties: false in top-level. Best regards, Krzysztof
