Hi Rob,
On Tue, Jun 15, 2021 at 9:16 PM Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> If a property has an 'items' list, then a 'minItems' or 'maxItems' with the
> same size as the list is redundant and can be dropped. Note that is DT
> schema specific behavior and not standard json-schema behavior. The tooling
> will fixup the final schema adding any unspecified minItems/maxItems.
>
> This condition is partially checked with the meta-schema already, but
> only if both 'minItems' and 'maxItems' are equal to the 'items' length.
> An improved meta-schema is pending.
> Signed-off-by: Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx>
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/stm32-dwmac.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/stm32-dwmac.yaml
> @@ -46,7 +46,6 @@ properties:
>
> clocks:
> minItems: 3
> - maxItems: 5
> items:
> - description: GMAC main clock
> - description: MAC TX clock
While resolving the conflict with commit fea99822914039c6
("dt-bindings: net: document ptp_ref clk in dwmac") in soc/for-next,
I noticed the following construct for clock-names:
clock-names:
minItems: 3
maxItems: 6
contains:
enum:
- stmmaceth
- mac-clk-tx
- mac-clk-rx
- ethstp
- eth-ck
- ptp_ref
Should this use items instead of enum, and drop maxItems, or is this
a valid construct to support specifying the clocks in random order?
If the latter, it does mean that the order of clock-names may not
match the order of the clock descriptions.
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
