Hi Niklas,
On Tue, Feb 13, 2024 at 12:38 AM Niklas Söderlund
<niklas.soderlund+renesas@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 2024-02-12 20:36:12 +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > On Sat, Jan 27, 2024 at 1:20 PM Niklas Söderlund
> > <niklas.soderlund+renesas@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > Compatibles can come in two formats. Either "vendor,ip-soc" or
> > > "vendor,soc-ip". Add a DT schema file documenting Renesas preferred
> > > policy and enforcing it for all new compatibles, except few existing
> > > patterns.
> > >
> > > Suggested-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Signed-off-by: Niklas Söderlund <niklas.soderlund+renesas@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > > * Changes since v1
> > > - Split the "SoC agnostic compatibles" section into two to make it's
> > > intent clearer.
> > > - Improved the documentation for each group of compatibles.
> > > - Reduced the number of regexp to create a larger target area. As
> > > suggested by Krzysztof the goal is not to validate each SoC name but
> > > check for the correct order of SoC-IP.
> >
> > Thanks for the update!
> >
> > > --- /dev/null
> > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/renesas/renesas-soc.yaml
> > > +properties:
> > > + compatible:
> > > + oneOf:
> > > + # Preferred naming style for compatibles of SoC components
> > > + - pattern: "^renesas,emev2-[a-z0-9-]+$"
> > > + - pattern: "^renesas,r(7s|8a|9a)[a-z0-9]+-[a-z0-9-]+$"
> > > + - pattern: "^renesas,rcar-[a-z0-9-]+$"
> > > + - pattern: "^renesas,rz[a-z0-9]*-[a-z0-9-]+$"
> > > + - pattern: "^renesas,sh-[a-z0-9-]+$"
> > > + - pattern: "^renesas,sh7[a-z0-9]+-[a-z0-9-]+$"
> >
> > I guess it's not worth adding rmobile and shmobile prefixes?
>
> Maybe we start with this and see how it goes?
Sure.
>
> >
> > > + # Fixed legacy compatibles
> > > + #
> > > + # List cannot grow with new bindings.
> > > + - enum:
> > > + - renesas,bsc-r8a73a4
> > > + - renesas,bsc-sh73a0
> > > + - renesas,dbsc-r8a73a4
> > > + - renesas,dbsc3-r8a7740
> > > + - renesas,em-gio
> > > + - renesas,em-sti
> > > + - renesas,em-uart
> >
> > Perhaps combine these three: "renesas,em-(gpio|sti|usrt)"?
>
> Will do.
That does mean these lines need to use
- pattern: "^renesas,em-(gpio|sti|uart)$"
right?
> > Now, how do I trigger violations?
> >
> > I added the following to a binding file:
> >
> > - enum:
> > - renesas,bogus-r8a7778
> > - renesas,bogus-r8a7779
> > - const: renesas,bogus
> >
> > but nothing happened with "make dt_binding_check".
> >
> > I added the following to a DTS file:
> >
> > compatible = "renesas,bogus-r8a7778", "renesas,bogus";
> >
> > again, nothing happened with "make dtbs_check".
> >
> > What am I missing?
>
> Hum, this is odd. I have confirmed your finding that
>
> compatible = "renesas,bogus-r8a7778", "renesas,bogus";
>
> or
>
> compatible = "renesas,bogus-r8a7778", "renesas,bogus-bar";
>
> Do not trigger an issue, but a single compatible,
>
> compatible = "renesas,bogus-r8a7778";
>
> Do trigger.
>
> I tested this before I reduced the regexp and IIRC it worked as expected
> for the RFC. Not sure if I have updated dt-schema since, but I know I
> rebased the branch for v2. I will try to figure out what have gone
> wrong, if anyone know if something changed in this area pleas let me
> know.
Thanks for confirming, and for looking into this!
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
