> -----Original Message-----
> From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Tuesday, March 5, 2024 10:07 PM
> To: Yuklin Soo <yuklin.soo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Linus Walleij
> <linus.walleij@xxxxxxxxxx>; Bartosz Golaszewski
> <bartosz.golaszewski@xxxxxxxxxx>; Hal Feng <hal.feng@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>;
> Leyfoon Tan <leyfoon.tan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Jianlong Huang
> <jianlong.huang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Emil Renner Berthing <kernel@xxxxxxxx>;
> Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx>; Krzysztof Kozlowski
> <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@xxxxxxxxxx>; Conor Dooley <conor+dt@xxxxxxxxxx>;
> Drew Fustini <drew@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: linux-gpio@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-riscv@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Paul Walmsley
> <paul.walmsley@xxxxxxxxxx>; Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Albert
> Ou <aou@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/6] dt-bindings: pinctrl: starfive: add JH8100 pinctrl
> bindings
>
> On 05/03/2024 13:00, Yuklin Soo wrote:
> >
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >> Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2024 4:10 PM
> >> To: Yuklin Soo <yuklin.soo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Linus Walleij
> >> <linus.walleij@xxxxxxxxxx>; Bartosz Golaszewski
> >> <bartosz.golaszewski@xxxxxxxxxx>; Hal Feng
> >> <hal.feng@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Leyfoon Tan
> >> <leyfoon.tan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Jianlong Huang
> >> <jianlong.huang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Emil Renner Berthing
> >> <kernel@xxxxxxxx>; Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx>; Krzysztof Kozlowski
> >> <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@xxxxxxxxxx>; Conor Dooley
> >> <conor+dt@xxxxxxxxxx>; Drew Fustini <drew@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> Cc: linux-gpio@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> >> devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-riscv@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Paul
> >> Walmsley <paul.walmsley@xxxxxxxxxx>; Palmer Dabbelt
> >> <palmer@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Albert Ou <aou@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/6] dt-bindings: pinctrl: starfive: add
> >> JH8100 pinctrl bindings
> >>
> >> On 07/02/2024 03:42, Yuklin Soo wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> + type: object
> >>>>> + additionalProperties: false
> >>>>> + patternProperties:
> >>>>> + '-pins$':
> >>>>> + type: object
> >>>>> + description: |
> >>>>> + A pinctrl node should contain at least one subnode
> >>>>> + representing
> >> the
> >>>>> + pinctrl groups available in the domain. Each subnode will list the
> >>>>> + pins it needs, and how they should be configured, with regard to
> >>>>> + muxer configuration, bias, input enable/disable, input schmitt
> >>>>> + trigger enable/disable, slew-rate and drive strength.
> >>>>> + allOf:
> >>>>> + - $ref: /schemas/pinctrl/pincfg-node.yaml
> >>>>> + - $ref: /schemas/pinctrl/pinmux-node.yaml
> >>>>> + additionalProperties: false
> >>>>
> >>>> Why the rest of the properties is not applicable?
> >>>
> >>> The regex “-pins$” make sure all client subnode names end with
> >>> suffix “-pins” (e.g, i2c0-scl-pins, i2c-sda-pins)
> >>
> >> I did not talk about subnodes.
> >>
> >> I asked why the rest of pincfg and pinmux schema properties are not
> allowed.
> >
> > Initially, I wanted to allow all properties in the pincfg and pinmux schema. I
> misunderstood the meaning of “additionalProperties: false”
> > and I thought it means all additional properties outside the pincfg
> > and pinmux schema are excluded. The “additionalProperties” will be set
> > to “true” to include the rest of the properties in pincfg and pinmux
> > schema and not to be restricted to only the properties defined in
>
> In that case drop all the properties and use unevaluatedProperties: false.
Isn’t that sufficient just to use “unevaluatedProperties: false” ?
To drop all the properties, we will be losing information below:
drive-strength-microamp:
enum: [ 2000, 4000, 8000, 12000 ]
slew-rate:
enum: [ 0, 1 ]
default: 0
description: |
0: slow (half frequency)
1: fast
>
> Fix your email setup, to wrap emails properly. This is unreadable.
>
> >
> >>
> >> Best regards,
> >> Krzysztof
> >
>
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof
