On 27/08/2024 11:29, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>>> + reg:
>>> + minItems: 2
>>
>> maxItems instead.
>
> Can change, but maybe use the chance to explain to me why "maxItems" and
> why also "instead".
because minItems is not constrained. maxItem is and, in case of lack of
minItems, it implies minItems.
>
>>
>>> +
>>> + reg-names:
>>> + items:
>>> + - const: cfg
>>> + - const: tlbif
>>> +
>>> + interrupts:
>>> + items:
>>> + - description: fault interrupt
>>> +
>>> + interrupt-names:
>>> + items:
>>> + - const: pvu
>>> +
>>> +required:
>>> + - compatible
>>> + - reg
>>> + - interrupts
>>> + - interrupt-names
>>> +
>>> +additionalProperties: false
>>> +
>>> +examples:
>>> + - |
>>> + ti-pvu@30f80000 {
>>
>> Node names should be generic. See also an explanation and list of
>> examples (not exhaustive) in DT specification:
>> https://devicetree-specification.readthedocs.io/en/latest/chapter2-devicetree-basics.html#generic-names-recommendation
>>
>> for sure "ti" is not generic. pvu is the device name.
>
> No problem - which one do you propose for this type of device?
iommu, but if this is not suitable, at pvu could stay. Just the first
'ti-' does not sound right in that case.
Best regards,
Krzysztof
