> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/6] dt-bindings: gpio: vf610: correct i.MX8ULP and > i.MX93 > > On 16/09/2023 04:03, Peng Fan (OSS) wrote: > > From: Peng Fan <peng.fan@xxxxxxx> > > > > i.MX8ULP and i.MX93 actually has two interrupts for each gpio > > controller, one for Trustzone non-secure world, one for secure world. > > > > And they has one register based, not two as i.MX7ULP or VF610. > > > > Although the Linux Kernel driver gpio-vf610.c could work with > > fsl,imx7ulp-gpio compatible, it is based on some tricks did in device > > tree with some offset added to base address. > > > > So actually i.MX8ULP/i.MX93 is not compatible with i.MX7ULP. > > > > Last, i.MX93 is directly derived from i.MX8ULP, so make i.MX93 GPIO > > compatible with i.MX8ULP > > > > Signed-off-by: Peng Fan <peng.fan@xxxxxxx> > > --- > > .../devicetree/bindings/gpio/gpio-vf610.yaml | 41 > +++++++++++++++++++--- > > 1 file changed, 37 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/gpio-vf610.yaml > > b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/gpio-vf610.yaml > > index 59427d97adf5..8c1f87a1a393 100644 > > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/gpio-vf610.yaml > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/gpio-vf610.yaml > > @@ -20,6 +20,7 @@ description: | > > properties: > > compatible: > > oneOf: > > + - const: fsl,imx8ulp-gpio > > - const: fsl,vf610-gpio > > - items: > > - const: fsl,imx7ulp-gpio > > @@ -27,16 +28,21 @@ properties: > > - items: > > - enum: > > - fsl,imx93-gpio > > - - fsl,imx8ulp-gpio > > - - const: fsl,imx7ulp-gpio > > + - const: fsl,imx8ulp-gpio > > > > reg: > > description: The first reg tuple represents the PORT module, the second > tuple > > represents the GPIO module. > > - maxItems: 2 > > + items: > > + - description: PORT register base address > > + - description: GPIO register base address > > + minItems: 1 > > > > interrupts: > > - maxItems: 1 > > + items: > > + - description: GPIO Trustzone non-secure interrupt number > > + - description: GPIO Trustzone secure interrupt number > > + minItems: 1 > > > > interrupt-controller: true > > > > @@ -78,6 +84,33 @@ required: > > - "#gpio-cells" > > - gpio-controller > > > > +allOf: > > + - if: > > + properties: > > + compatible: > > + contains: > > + enum: > > + - fsl,vf610-gpio > > + - fsl,imx7ulp-gpio > > + then: > > + properties: > > + interrupts: > > + items: > > + - description: GPIO interrupt number > > So this is different than first interrupt mentioned in top-level? Should be same, I will use maxItems: 1 here. > > > > + reg: > > + items: > > + - description: PORT register base address > > + - description: GPIO register base address > > You have the description in top-level, no need to repeat it. Just > minItems: 2... although it depends whether top-level property will stay. Ok, got it. > > > > + else: > > + properties: > > + interrupts: > > + items: > > + - description: GPIO Trustzone non-secure interrupt number > > + - description: GPIO Trustzone secure interrupt number > > + reg: > > + items: > > + - description: GPIO register base address > > So the first entry is different between variants? Then top-level should be just > min/maxItems. Yes, I think so. Rob commented to list items in top level, so .. Thanks, Peng. > > > + > > additionalProperties: false > > > > examples: > > > > Best regards, > Krzysztof
