On 07/07/2024 11:13, Shresth Prasad wrote: > Convert txt bindings of Marvell XOR v2 engines to dtschema to allow > for validation. > > Also add missing property `dma-coherent` as `drivers/dma/mv_xor_v2.c` > calls various dma-coherent memory functions. > > Signed-off-by: Shresth Prasad <shresthprasad7@xxxxxxxxx> > --- > Changes in v2: > - Update commit message to indicate addition of `dma-coherent` > - Change maintainer > - Change compatible section > - Add `minItems` to `clock-names` > - Remove "location and length" from reg description > - List out `clock-names` items in `if:` > - Create two variants of `if:` > > Tested against `marvell/armada-7040-db.dtb`, `marvell/armada-7040-mochabin.dtb` > and `marvell/armada-8080-db.dtb` > > .../bindings/dma/marvell,xor-v2.yaml | 86 +++++++++++++++++++ > .../devicetree/bindings/dma/mv-xor-v2.txt | 28 ------ > 2 files changed, 86 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-) > create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dma/marvell,xor-v2.yaml > delete mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dma/mv-xor-v2.txt > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dma/marvell,xor-v2.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dma/marvell,xor-v2.yaml > new file mode 100644 > index 000000000000..da58f6e0feab > --- /dev/null > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dma/marvell,xor-v2.yaml > @@ -0,0 +1,86 @@ > +# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 > +%YAML 1.2 > +--- > +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/dma/marvell,xor-v2.yaml# > +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml# > + > +title: Marvell XOR v2 engines > + > +maintainers: > + - Hans de Goede <hdegoede@xxxxxxxxxx> I don't think Hans maintains this platform - Marvell SoCs. Didn't we talk already what is "platform"? > + > +properties: > + compatible: > + oneOf: > + - const: marvell,xor-v2 > + - items: > + - enum: > + - marvell,armada-7k-xor > + - const: marvell,xor-v2 > + > + > +allOf: > + - if: > + properties: > + clocks: > + maxItems: 1 Still not much improved. There are plenty of examples how this is done, so please do not invent one, entirely new style. Think for a sec, why doing things differently? Why this code is the first example of such syntax? I asked to limit it pear each variant. https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.8/source/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ufs/qcom,ufs.yaml#L132 > + then: > + properties: > + clock-names: > + items: > + - const: core > + - if: > + properties: > + clocks: > + minItems: 2 > + required: > + - clocks > + then: > + properties: > + clock-names: > + items: > + - const: core > + - const: reg > + required: > + - clock-names > + > +additionalProperties: false > + > +examples: > + - | > + xor0@6a0000 { xor@6a0000 Best regards, Krzysztof
