On 18/04/2023 17:06, Rob Herring wrote: > The "qcom,paired" schema is all wrong. First, it's a list rather than an > object(dictionary). Second, it is missing a required type. The meta-schema > normally catches this, but schemas under "$defs" was not getting checked. > A fix for that is pending. > > Signed-off-by: Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx> > --- > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/qcom,pmic-mpp.yaml | 5 +++-- > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/qcom,pmic-mpp.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/qcom,pmic-mpp.yaml > index 9412b9362328..4c3e9ff82105 100644 > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/qcom,pmic-mpp.yaml > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/qcom,pmic-mpp.yaml > @@ -144,8 +144,9 @@ $defs: > enum: [0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7] > > qcom,paired: > - - description: > - Indicates that the pin should be operating in paired mode. > + type: boolean > + description: > + Indicates that the pin should be operating in paired mode. Current Linux implementation uses it as a generic pinconf param pinconf_generic_params which is parsed by: pinconf_generic_parse_dt_config() -> parse_dt_cfg() -> of_property_read_u32() The pinctrl-spmi-mpp.c driver, using this schema, treat it as a bool, but I still wonder how the code will parse bool with of_property_read_u32(). Maybe it should be uint32 with value of 0 and 1? Best regards, Krzysztof
