Hi Rob, > El 16 mar 2021, a las 21:54, Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx> escribió: > > On Mon, Mar 15, 2021 at 12:41:55PM +0100, Álvaro Fernández Rojas wrote: >> Add binding documentation for the GPIO controller found in BCM6318, BCM6328, >> BCM6358, BCM6362, BCM6368 and BCM63268 SoCs. >> >> Co-developed-by: Jonas Gorski <jonas.gorski@xxxxxxxxx> >> Signed-off-by: Jonas Gorski <jonas.gorski@xxxxxxxxx> >> Signed-off-by: Álvaro Fernández Rojas <noltari@xxxxxxxxx> >> --- >> v7: new patch, splitted from pinctrl documentation >> >> .../bindings/gpio/brcm,bcm63xx-gpio.yaml | 83 +++++++++++++++++++ >> 1 file changed, 83 insertions(+) >> create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/brcm,bcm63xx-gpio.yaml >> >> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/brcm,bcm63xx-gpio.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/brcm,bcm63xx-gpio.yaml >> new file mode 100644 >> index 000000000000..94a4f00ae2c7 >> --- /dev/null >> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/brcm,bcm63xx-gpio.yaml >> @@ -0,0 +1,83 @@ >> +# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause >> +%YAML 1.2 >> +--- >> +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/gpio/brcm,bcm63xx-gpio.yaml# >> +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml# >> + >> +title: Broadcom BCM63xx GPIO controller >> + >> +maintainers: >> + - Álvaro Fernández Rojas <noltari@xxxxxxxxx> >> + - Jonas Gorski <jonas.gorski@xxxxxxxxx> >> + >> +description: |+ >> + The GPIO controller node should be the child of a syscon node. >> + >> + Refer to the the bindings described in >> + Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/syscon.yaml > > The above description is not too useful because it should hopefully > later on in the series be expressed as a schema. IOW, the syscon schema > should have a gpio child node with a $ref to this schema. Is the following OK? description: BCM63XX GPIO controller driver which supports the SoC system controller supplied GPIO registers. The BCM63XX GPIO controller node must be defined as a child node of the BCM63XX GPIO system controller node. > > What would be useful is to say something about the GPIO block. Something like…? > >> + >> +properties: >> + compatible: >> + enum: >> + - brcm,bcm6318-gpio >> + - brcm,bcm6328-gpio >> + - brcm,bcm6358-gpio >> + - brcm,bcm6362-gpio >> + - brcm,bcm6368-gpio >> + - brcm,bcm63268-gpio >> + >> + data: >> + $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/uint32 >> + description: | >> + Offset in the register map for the data register (in bytes). >> + >> + dirout: >> + $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/uint32 >> + description: | >> + Offset in the register map for the dirout register (in bytes). > > As I said earlier, copy what brcm,bcm6345-gpio.txt did and use reg > instead of data and dirout properties. Ok, I will remove dirout and data properties. > > That binding says it is for bcm63xx SoCs, too. So that should be > resolved. It looks like it should be 1 binding IMO. The only difference > I see is the number of GPIO lines and register size. The fact that the > parent is a syscon in some cases is irrelevant. Please be more specific. What do you want me to do with this? How should I handle that? > >> + >> + gpio-controller: true >> + >> + "#gpio-cells": >> + const: 2 >> + >> + gpio-ranges: >> + maxItems: 1 >> + >> + reg: >> + maxItems: 1 >> + >> +required: >> + - compatible >> + - gpio-controller >> + - gpio-ranges >> + - '#gpio-cells' >> + >> +additionalProperties: false >> + >> +examples: >> + - | >> + gpio@0 { >> + compatible = "brcm,bcm6328-gpio"; >> + reg = <0x0 0x10>; >> + >> + data = <0xc>; >> + dirout = <0x4>; >> + >> + gpio-controller; >> + gpio-ranges = <&pinctrl 0 0 32>; >> + #gpio-cells = <2>; >> + }; >> + >> + - | >> + gpio@0 { >> + compatible = "brcm,bcm63268-gpio"; >> + reg = <0x0 0x10>; >> + >> + data = <0xc>; >> + dirout = <0x4>; >> + >> + gpio-controller; >> + gpio-ranges = <&pinctrl 0 0 52>; >> + #gpio-cells = <2>; >> + }; >> -- >> 2.20.1