On 23/08/2024 08:44, Macpaul Lin wrote: > > On 8/8/24 20:04, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >> >> >> External email : Please do not click links or open attachments until you >> have verified the sender or the content. >> >> On 08/08/2024 12:57, Macpaul Lin wrote: >>> Convert the mfd: mediatek: mt6397 binding to DT schema format. >>> >>> New updates in this conversion: >>> - Align generic names of DT schema "audio-codec" and "regulators". >>> - mt6397-regulators: Replace the "txt" reference with newly added DT >>> schema. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Sen Chu <sen.chu@xxxxxxxxxxxx> >>> Signed-off-by: Macpaul Lin <macpaul.lin@xxxxxxxxxxxx> >>> --- >>> .../bindings/mfd/mediatek,mt6397.yaml | 202 ++++++++++++++++++ >>> .../devicetree/bindings/mfd/mt6397.txt | 110 ---------- >> >> You are doing conversions in odd order... and ignore my comments. The >> example from your regulator binding is supposed to be here - I wrote it >> last time. >> >> Due to doing changes totally unsynchronized, this CANNOT be merged >> without unnecessary maintainer coordination, because of dependency. >> >> Sorry, that's not how it works for MFD devices. >> >> Perform conversion of entire device in ONE patchset. > > Okay, will collect the conversion of mt6323-regulator.txt and > rtc-mt6397.txt in the next version. > >>> 2 files changed, 202 insertions(+), 110 deletions(-) >>> create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/mediatek,mt6397.yaml >>> delete mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/mt6397.txt >>> >>> Changes for v1: >>> - This patch depends on conversion of mediatek,mt6397-regulator.yaml >>> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20240807091738.18387-1-macpaul.lin@xxxxxxxxxxxx/T/ > > [snip] > >>> +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/mfd/mediatek,mt6397.yaml# >>> +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml# >>> + >>> +title: MediaTek MT6397/MT6323 Multifunction Device >>> + >>> +maintainers: >>> + - Sen Chu <sen.chu@xxxxxxxxxxxx> >>> + - Macpaul Lin <macpaul.lin@xxxxxxxxxxxx> >>> + >>> +description: | >>> + MT6397/MT6323 is a multifunction device with the following sub modules: >> >> MFD is Linuxism, avoid it. > > Will replace MFD with "power management system chip with sub-modules" > something like this in next version. > >>> + - Regulator >>> + - RTC >>> + - Audio codec >>> + - GPIO >>> + - Clock >>> + - LED >>> + - Keys >>> + - Power controller >>> + >>> + It is interfaced to host controller using SPI interface by a proprietary hardware >>> + called PMIC wrapper or pwrap. MT6397/MT6323 MFD is a child device of pwrap. >>> + See the following for pwarp node definitions: >>> + ../soc/mediatek/mediatek,pwrap.yaml >> >> Drop, instead add proper ref or compatible in parent node. > > I'm confused here. I've checked mediatek,mt6357.yaml as a reference > . > It uses the similar method here. > "See the following for pwarp node definitions:" > "Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/mediatek/mediatek,pwrap.yaml" What exactly is confusing? The other example is wrong. It's not a schema, but free form text. Write schema so it would be applied and would validate the DTS. > > If "$ref: /schemas/soc/mediatek/mediatek,pwrap.yaml" is added here, > dt_bindings_check will complain the following errors and more. > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/mediatek,mt6397.example.dtb: pmic: > compatible: 'oneOf' conditional failed, one must be fixed: > ['mediatek,mt6397'] is too short > 'mediatek,mt6397' is not one of ['mediatek,mt2701-pwrap', > 'mediatek,mt6765-pwrap', 'mediatek,mt6779-pwrap', > 'mediatek,mt6795-pwrap', 'mediatek,mt6797-pwrap', > 'mediatek,mt6873-pwrap', 'mediatek,mt7622-pwrap', > 'mediatek,mt8135-pwrap', 'mediatek,mt8173-pwrap', > 'mediatek,mt8183-pwrap', 'mediatek,mt8186-pwrap', > 'mediatek,mt8195-pwrap', 'mediatek,mt8365-pwrap', 'mediatek,mt8516-pwrap'] > 'mediatek,mt6397' is not one of ['mediatek,mt8186-pwrap', > 'mediatek,mt8195-pwrap'] > 'mediatek,mt6397' is not one of ['mediatek,mt8188-pwrap'] > from schema $id: > http://devicetree.org/schemas/mfd/mediatek,mt6397.yaml# > > Which also conflicts with the comments in the examples.. So investigate and fix this, instead of hiding the problem. > >> + pwrap { > > > > Drop > > Please help to check if a $ref or a compatible of pwrap should be added > here. Where did you add the $ref? The child node should have it, not parent, obviously. Just look at one of many other examples having children. ... >> >>> + - const: mediatek,mt6358-rtc >>> + >>> + regulators: >>> + type: object >>> + oneOf: >>> + - $ref: /schemas/regulator/mediatek,mt6358-regulator.yaml >>> + - $ref: /schemas/regulator/mediatek,mt6397-regulator.yaml >> >> And how is it supposed to be tested? > > The dt_bindings_check didn't complain eny thing about these. Really? Then checkout the maintainer tree, apply this patch and test again. You know, it is impossible for us to apply a patch on top of linux-next... > Of course I've included the conversion patch of > mediatek,mt6397-regulator.yaml. > >>> + unevaluatedProperties: false >>> + description: >>> + Regulators >>> + For mt6323, see ../regulator/mt6323-regulator.txt >> >> Drop, useless. > Should I convert it to DT schema and add to $ref above together? Or just use compatibles. There are also examples of this - in MFD devices, Qcom display. > >> >>> + properties: >>> + compatible: >>> + oneOf: >>> + - enum: >>> + - mediatek,mt6323-regulator >>> + - mediatek,mt6358-regulator >>> + - mediatek,mt6397-regulator >>> + - items: >>> + - enum: >>> + - mediatek,mt6366-regulator # Regulator MT6366 >>> + - const: mediatek,mt6358-regulator >>> + >>> + audio-codec: >>> + type: object >>> + unevaluatedProperties: false >> >> This does not make sense. You do not have any ref here. > > The dt_bindings_check will complain error here. > Will replace it with "additionalProperties: false". > > >>> + description: >>> + Audio codec >>> + properties: >>> + compatible: >>> + oneOf: >>> + - enum: >>> + - mediatek,mt6397-codec >>> + - mediatek,mt6358-sound >>> + - items: >>> + - enum: >>> + - mediatek,mt6366-sound # Codec MT6366 >>> + - const: mediatek,mt6358-sound >> >> This wasn't in the old binding. Commit msg also does not explain why you >> are doing changes from conversion. > > Will update new added item into commit message in next version. > >>> + >>> + clk: >>> + type: object >>> + unevaluatedProperties: false >> >> Again, no, it does not work like this. See example schema for >> explanation of this. > > Will replace it with "additionalProperties: false". > >> Convert all children - entire device. Then either use ref or >> additionalProperties: true. See Qualcomm mdss bindings for example. Oh, look here, I even mentioned Qualcomm to use as an example... > > There is no more children available for the clock node of this PMIC. > This is a clock buffer node. However, there are no sub nodes or any > public document explain these clock buffer in public domain. > What I've got is the compatible string in the driver. Then I don't know what you want to express here. > >>> + description: >>> + Clock >> >> Your descriptions are useless. You just said "clk" node is "clock". Really? > > Will improve it in next version. Best regards, Krzysztof
