> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/6] dt-bindings: firmware: arm,scmi: set > additionalProperties to true > > On 07/04/2024 12:04, Peng Fan wrote: > >> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/6] dt-bindings: firmware: arm,scmi: set > >> additionalProperties to true > >> > >> On 07/04/2024 02:37, Peng Fan wrote: > >>>> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/6] dt-bindings: firmware: arm,scmi: set > >>>> additionalProperties to true > >>>> > >>>> On 05/04/2024 14:39, Peng Fan (OSS) wrote: > >>>>> From: Peng Fan <peng.fan@xxxxxxx> > >>>>> > >>>>> When adding vendor extension protocols, there is dt-schema warning: > >>>>> " > >>>>> imx,scmi.example.dtb: scmi: 'protocol@81', 'protocol@84' do not > >>>>> match any of the regexes: 'pinctrl-[0-9]+' > >>>>> " > >>>>> > >>>>> Set additionalProperties to true to address the issue. > >>>> > >>>> I do not see anything addressed here, except making the binding > >>>> accepting anything anywhere... > >>> > >>> I not wanna add vendor protocols in arm,scmi.yaml, so will introduce > >>> a new yaml imx.scmi.yaml which add i.MX SCMI protocol extension. > >>> > >>> With additionalProperties set to false, I not know how, please suggest. > >> > >> First of all, you cannot affect negatively existing devices (their > >> bindings) and your patch does exactly that. This should make you > >> thing what is the correct approach... > >> > >> Rob gave you the comment about missing compatible - you still did not > >> address that. > > > > I added the compatible in patch 2/6 in the examples "compatible = > "arm,scmi";" > > So you claim that your vendor extensions are the same or fully compatible > with arm,scmi and you add nothing... Are your extensions/protocol valid for > arm,scmi? Yes. They are valid for arm,scmi. If yes, why is this in separate binding. If no, why you use someone > else's compatible? Per SCMI Spec 0x80-0xFF: Reserved for vendor or platform-specific extensions to this interface i.MX use 0x81 for BBM, 0x84 for MISC. But other vendors will use the id for their own protocol. I use a separate binding here is to avoid add more vendor stuff in arm,scmi.yaml. Otherwise we will have to add a list as: if nxp xxx else if qcom xxx else if xx yyy. I could add back i.mx extension to arm,scmi.yaml if people agree. Thanks Peng. > > Maybe your binding is correct, feel free to convince me (and read first writing > bindings). > > Best regards, > Krzysztof
