> -----Original Message----- > From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@xxxxxxxxxx> > Sent: 13 February 2025 17:31 > To: Swathi K S <swathi.ks@xxxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: krzk+dt@xxxxxxxxxx; andrew+netdev@xxxxxxx; davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; > edumazet@xxxxxxxxxx; kuba@xxxxxxxxxx; pabeni@xxxxxxxxxx; > robh@xxxxxxxxxx; conor+dt@xxxxxxxxxx; richardcochran@xxxxxxxxx; > mcoquelin.stm32@xxxxxxxxx; alexandre.torgue@xxxxxxxxxxx; > rmk+kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; netdev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; > devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-stm32@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; > linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 1/2] dt-bindings: net: Add FSD EQoS device tree > bindings > > On 13/02/2025 12:04, Swathi K S wrote: > > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@xxxxxxxxxx> > >> Sent: 13 February 2025 13:24 > >> To: Swathi K S <swathi.ks@xxxxxxxxxxx> > >> Cc: krzk+dt@xxxxxxxxxx; andrew+netdev@xxxxxxx; > davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; > >> edumazet@xxxxxxxxxx; kuba@xxxxxxxxxx; pabeni@xxxxxxxxxx; > >> robh@xxxxxxxxxx; conor+dt@xxxxxxxxxx; richardcochran@xxxxxxxxx; > >> mcoquelin.stm32@xxxxxxxxx; alexandre.torgue@xxxxxxxxxxx; > >> rmk+kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; netdev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; > >> devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-stm32@st-md- > mailman.stormreply.com; > >> linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > >> Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 1/2] dt-bindings: net: Add FSD EQoS device > >> tree bindings > >> > >> On Thu, Feb 13, 2025 at 10:16:23AM +0530, Swathi K S wrote: > >>> + clock-names: > >>> + minItems: 5 > >>> + maxItems: 10 > >>> + contains: > >>> + enum: > >>> + - ptp_ref > >>> + - master_bus > >>> + - slave_bus > >>> + - tx > >>> + - rx > >>> + - master2_bus > >>> + - slave2_bus > >>> + - eqos_rxclk_mux > >>> + - eqos_phyrxclk > >>> + - dout_peric_rgmii_clk > >> > >> This does not match the previous entry. It should be strictly ordered > >> with > >> minItems: 5. > > > > Hi Krzysztof, > > Thanks for reviewing. > > In FSD SoC, we have 2 instances of ethernet in two blocks. > > One instance needs 5 clocks and the other needs 10 clocks. > > I understand and I do not think this is contradictory to what I asked. > If it is, then why/how? > > > > > I tried to understand this by looking at some other dt-binding files > > as given below, but looks like they follow similar approach > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/stm32-dwmac.yaml > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/rockchip-dwmac.yaml > > > > Could you please guide me on how to implement this? > > Also, please help me understand what is meant by 'strictly ordered' > > Every other 99% of bindings. Just like your clocks property. Hi Krzysztof, Thanks for your feedback. I want to make sure I fully understand your comment. I can see we have added clocks and clock names in the same order. Could you please help in detail what specifically needs to be modified regarding the ordering and minItems/maxItems usage? -Swathi > > Best regards, > Krzysztof
