On 09/12/2022 16:11, Luca Weiss wrote:
> On Fri Dec 9, 2022 at 4:05 PM CET, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 09/12/2022 15:29, Luca Weiss wrote:
>>> The code in ufs-qcom-ice.c needs the ICE reg to be named "ice". Add this
>>> in the bindings so the existing dts can validate successfully.
>>>
>>> Also sm8450 is using ICE since commit 276ee34a40c1 ("arm64: dts: qcom:
>>> sm8450: add Inline Crypto Engine registers and clock") so move the
>>> compatible to the correct if.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Luca Weiss <luca.weiss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> ---
>>> (no cover subject)
>>>
>>> The only remaining validation issues I see is the following on sc8280xp-crd.dtb
>>> and sa8540p-ride.dtb:
>>>
>>> Unevaluated properties are not allowed ('required-opps', 'dma-coherent' were unexpected)
>>>
>>> Maybe someone who knows something about this can handle this?
>>>
>>> And the patch adding qcom,sm6115-ufshc hasn't been applied yet.
>>> ---
>>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ufs/qcom,ufs.yaml | 8 +++++++-
>>> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ufs/qcom,ufs.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ufs/qcom,ufs.yaml
>>> index f2d6298d926c..58a2fb2c83c3 100644
>>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ufs/qcom,ufs.yaml
>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ufs/qcom,ufs.yaml
>>> @@ -102,7 +102,6 @@ allOf:
>>> - qcom,sc8280xp-ufshc
>>> - qcom,sm8250-ufshc
>>> - qcom,sm8350-ufshc
>>> - - qcom,sm8450-ufshc
>>> then:
>>> properties:
>>> clocks:
>>> @@ -130,6 +129,7 @@ allOf:
>>> - qcom,sdm845-ufshc
>>> - qcom,sm6350-ufshc
>>> - qcom,sm8150-ufshc
>>> + - qcom,sm8450-ufshc
>>> then:
>>> properties:
>>> clocks:
>>> @@ -149,6 +149,12 @@ allOf:
>>> reg:
>>> minItems: 2
>>> maxItems: 2
>>> + reg-names:
>>
>> There are no reg-names in top-level, so it's surprising to see its
>> customized here. It seems no one ever documented that usage...
>
> From what I can tell, from driver side all devices not using ICE don't
> need reg-names, only the "ice" reg is referenced by name in the driver.
>
> I didn't add it top-level because with only one reg I think we're not
> supposed to use reg-names, right?
And you still won't need to use. Yet property should be rather described
in top-level which also will unify the items here (so no different
2-item reg-names in variants).
Just add it to top-level with minItems: 1 and per variant customize:
1. maxItems: 1
2. minItems: 2 + required
The "required" is a bit questionable... this was never added by Eric to
the bindings. Driver support and DTS were added completely skipping
bindings...
Best regards,
Krzysztof
