On 22.11.2023 16:00, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
On 22/11/2023 15:52, Rafał Miłecki wrote:
+maintainers:
+ - Rafał Miłecki <rafal@xxxxxxxxxx>
+
+allOf:
+ - $ref: serial.yaml#
+
+properties:
+ compatible:
+ items:
+ - enum:
+ - brcm,bcm4908-hs-uart
+ - brcm,bcm4912-hs-uart
+ - brcm,bcm6756-hs-uart
+ - brcm,bcm6813-hs-uart
+ - brcm,bcm6846-hs-uart
+ - brcm,bcm6855-hs-uart
+ - brcm,bcm6856-hs-uart
+ - brcm,bcm6858-hs-uart
+ - brcm,bcm6878-hs-uart
+ - brcm,bcm47622-hs-uart
+ - brcm,bcm63138-hs-uart
+ - brcm,bcm63146-hs-uart
+ - brcm,bcm63158-hs-uart
+ - brcm,bcm63178-hs-uart
+ - const: brcm,bcmbca-hs-uart
git grep did not find driver for this compatible. Is it in separate
patchset?
No. My project based on BCMBCA has been canceled and I don't work on it
full time anymore. I just wanted to fill empty bits I can afford
handling in my free time and complete hardware description in DTS.
I may still work on some BCMBCA drivers from time to time but as a side
project.
This means we cannot use driver to verify whether the fallback is
actually suitable. Considering that existing UART bindings do not
fallback (brcm,bcm6345-uart, brcm,bcm7271-uart), I don't understand what
is the benefit here.
I believed the rule for maintaining bindings and DTS files was to
describe hardware no matter what/if system needs it.
For example a year ago I added binding for BCMBCA SoC timer without
actual driver, see e112f2de151b ("dt-bindings: timer: Add Broadcom's
BCMBCA timers").
I'm not sure if we're going to agree on this, but personally I like
describing hardware as much as I can. So it's well documented /
understood and people may eventually write drivers for it. Maybe it's
partially because I come from Broadcom's world that isn't well known
for upstream efforts in general.
As for verifying this binding against actual driver I can definitely
understand your concerns. Hoping it may help I uploaded Broadcom's HS
UART driver extracted from the RAXE500-V1.0.8.70_2.0.36_gpl SDK/GPL
package: http://files.zajec.net/hs_uart/
Please note it's not much of a clean code and its design would not be
accepted upstream but hopefully you can glance at it to verify this
binding's compatibility.
Let me know if there is anything else (other than rewriting Broadcom's
downstream driver) I could do to get this binding accepted.
