On 05.07.2023 10:37, Miquel Raynal wrote: > Hi Arseniy, > > AVKrasnov@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote on Wed, 5 Jul 2023 09:54:33 +0300: > >> Meson NAND supports both 512B and 1024B ECC step size, so replace >> 'const' for only 1024B step size with enum for both sizes. >> >> Signed-off-by: Arseniy Krasnov <AVKrasnov@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> --- >> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mtd/amlogic,meson-nand.yaml | 4 +++- >> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mtd/amlogic,meson-nand.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mtd/amlogic,meson-nand.yaml >> index 3bec8af91bbb..81ca8828731a 100644 >> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mtd/amlogic,meson-nand.yaml >> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mtd/amlogic,meson-nand.yaml >> @@ -49,7 +49,8 @@ patternProperties: >> const: hw >> >> nand-ecc-step-size: >> - const: 1024 >> + enum: [512, 1024] >> + default: 1024 > > I was actually wrong in my previous review, there is no strong default > here as the existing binding (and code) try to use the closest > parameters required by the NAND chip: we pick the "optimal" > configuration. So if you don't provide any value here, we expect > the strength and step size advertized by the chip to be used. This is a > common default in the raw NAND subsystem. > > Please drop the default line, re-integrate the missing R-by tag from > Rob and in a separate patch please mark nand-ecc-step-size and > nand-ecc-strength mandatory if the other is provide. IOW, we expect > either both, or none of them, but not a single one. I see, no problem! "mandatory" means update description of both fields like: description: Mandatory if nand-ecc-step-size is set. etc. ? > >> >> nand-ecc-strength: >> enum: [8, 16, 24, 30, 40, 50, 60] >> @@ -93,6 +94,7 @@ examples: >> nand@0 { >> reg = <0>; >> nand-rb = <0>; >> + nand-ecc-step-size = <1024>; > > So in the end this line is wrong and once you get the description right > as I mentioned it above, this will fail to pass > `make DT_SCHEMA_FILES=Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mtd/ dt_binidng_check` > Please drop it from the example, don't add the second property here, > it's best to show a clean example where people stop tampering for no > reason with the optimal values. Ok! Thanks, Arseniy > >> }; >> }; >> > > > Thanks, > Miquèl