On 28/08/2024 22:10, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> Hi Krzysztof,
>
> On Mon, Aug 19, 2024 at 1:11 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 31, 2024 at 09:37:36AM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>>> On Tue, Jul 30, 2024 at 6:24 PM Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>> On Fri, Jul 26, 2024 at 03:38:06PM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>>>>> The R-Car E-FUSE blocks can be modelled better using the nvmem
>>>>> framework.
>>>>>
>>>>> Replace the R-Car V3U example by an R-Car S4-8 ES1.2 example, to show
>>>>> the definition of nvmem cells. While at it, drop unneeded labels from
>>>>> the examples, and fix indentation.
>>>>>
>>>>> Add an entry to the MAINTAINERS file.
>>>>>
>>>>> Reported-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@xxxxxxxxx>
>>>>> ---
>>>>> v3:
>>>>> - New.
>>>>>
>>>>> I would expect that the calib@144 node needs:
>>>>>
>>>>> #nvmem-cell-cells = <0>;
So this is for mac-base...
>>>>>
>>>>> but after adding that, "make dt_binding_check" starts complaining:
>>>>>
>>>>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/nvmem/renesas,rcar-efuse.example.dtb: fuse@e6078800: nvmem-layout: 'oneOf' conditional failed, one must be fixed:
>>>>> '#address-cells', '#size-cells', 'calib@144' do not match any of the regexes: 'pinctrl-[0-9]+'
>>>>> Unevaluated properties are not allowed ('nvmem-cell-cells' was unexpected)
>>>>
>>>> Did you want 'nvmem-cell-cells' or '#nvmem-cell-cells'?
>>>
>>> Oops, I've been (manually) re-adding and removing it again too many
>>> times during my investigations. "#nvmem-cell-cells", of course.
>>> According to my build logs, I had it right at least once ;-)
>>>
>>>>> 'kontron,sl28-vpd' was expected
>>>>> 'onie,tlv-layout' was expected
>>>>> from schema $id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/nvmem/renesas,rcar-efuse.yaml#
>>>>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/nvmem/renesas,rcar-efuse.example.dtb: fuse@e6078800: nvmem-layout: Unevaluated properties are not allowed ('#address-cells', '#size-cells', 'calib@144' were unexpected)
>>>>> from schema $id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/nvmem/renesas,rcar-efuse.yaml#
>>>>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/nvmem/renesas,rcar-efuse.example.dtb: fuse@e6078800: Unevaluated properties are not allowed ('nvmem-layout' was unexpected)
>>>>> from schema $id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/nvmem/renesas,rcar-efuse.yaml#
>>>
>>> Anyway, with or without the typo, the error message is about the same:
>>>
>>> - Unevaluated properties are not allowed ('nvmem-cell-cells' was unexpected)
>>> + Unevaluated properties are not allowed ('#nvmem-cell-cells' was unexpected)
>>
>> And if you test your schema or DTS with all nvmem (so also layouts)
>> schemas?
>>
>> Apparently fixed-layout schema was not applied.
>
> With today's dt-schema:
>
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/nvmem/renesas,rcar-efuse.example.dtb:
> fuse@e6078800: nvmem-layout: 'oneOf' conditional failed, one must be
> fixed:
> '#address-cells', '#size-cells', 'calib@144' do not match any
> of the regexes: 'pinctrl-[0-9]+'
> Unevaluated properties are not allowed ('#nvmem-cell-cells'
> was unexpected)
> 'kontron,sl28-vpd' was expected
> 'onie,tlv-layout' was expected
> from schema $id:
> http://devicetree.org/schemas/nvmem/renesas,rcar-efuse.yaml#
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/nvmem/renesas,rcar-efuse.example.dtb:
> fuse@e6078800: nvmem-layout: Unevaluated properties are not allowed
> ('#address-cells', '#size-cells', 'calib@144' were unexpected)
> from schema $id:
> http://devicetree.org/schemas/nvmem/renesas,rcar-efuse.yaml#
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/nvmem/renesas,rcar-efuse.example.dtb:
> fuse@e6078800: Unevaluated properties are not allowed ('nvmem-layout'
> was unexpected)
> from schema $id:
> http://devicetree.org/schemas/nvmem/renesas,rcar-efuse.yaml#
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/nvmem/renesas,rcar-efuse.example.dtb:
> nvmem-layout: calib@144: Unevaluated properties are not allowed
> ('#nvmem-cell-cells' was unexpected)
> from schema $id:
> http://devicetree.org/schemas/nvmem/layouts/fixed-layout.yaml#
>
> According to the last line, fixed-layout.yaml is applied.
> Am I missing something?
I cannot reproduce it. Neither on 2024.6.dev5+g0e44e14b7eb4 nor on
todays 2024.6.dev16+gc51125d571ca (which is actually from 15th of Aug).
But maybe we talk about modified patch, but then which exactly?
Best regards,
Krzysztof
