On 1/9/24 11:22, Xu Yilun wrote:
On Tue, Jan 09, 2024 at 09:16:33AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
On 09/01/2024 09:15, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
+properties:
+ $nodename:
+ pattern: "^fpga-bridge(@.*)?$"
Not sure, but maybe we need to allow fpga-bridge-1? Could we have more
than one bridge on given system?
Yilun: Any comment on this?
We can have more bridges, but IIUC people use fpga-bridge@0, fpga-bridge@0
to identify them. So the expression is OK to me.
So you claim unit address thus reg with some sort of bus address is a
requirement? Then "?" is not correct in that pattern.
I expect it is about that people are using fpga-bridge@0 but bridge is not on
the bus. Yilun said that reg property in altr,socfpga-fpga2sdram-bridge.yaml is
optional which means no reg property no @XXX in node name.
That's why I think that expression is correct. If there are more bridges without
reg property then I expect we need to get more examples to align expression.
If we allow node name without unit address, thus not being part of any
This is valid usecase.
bus, then the only question is whether it is possible to have system
with more than two FPGA bridges. If the answer is "yes", which I think
The answer is yes.
is the case, then the pattern should already allow it:
(@[0-9a-f]+|-[0-9]+)?
Or better go with what I used recently for narrowed choices:
(@.*|-([0-9]|[1-9][0-9]+))?
It is good to me.
I actually didn't know much about DTS & its Schema, thanks for all your
input.
Ok. Will send v3 with it.
Thanks,
Michal
