Re: [PATCH v2 17/21] dt-bindings: ipmi: Convert ASPEED KCS binding to schema

["Andrew Jeffery" <andrew@xxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, 9 Apr 2021, at 14:45, Zev Weiss wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 19, 2021 at 01:27:48AM CDT, Andrew Jeffery wrote:
> >Given the deprecated binding, improve the ability to detect issues in
> >the platform devicetrees. Further, a subsequent patch will introduce a
> >new interrupts property for specifying SerIRQ behaviour, so convert
> >before we do any further additions.
> >
> >Signed-off-by: Andrew Jeffery <andrew@xxxxxxxx>
> >---
> > .../bindings/ipmi/aspeed,ast2400-kcs-bmc.yaml | 92 +++++++++++++++++++
> > .../bindings/ipmi/aspeed-kcs-bmc.txt          | 33 -------
> > 2 files changed, 92 insertions(+), 33 deletions(-)
> > create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ipmi/aspeed,ast2400-kcs-bmc.yaml
> > delete mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ipmi/aspeed-kcs-bmc.txt
> >
> >diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ipmi/aspeed,ast2400-kcs-bmc.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ipmi/aspeed,ast2400-kcs-bmc.yaml
> >new file mode 100644
> >index 000000000000..697ca575454f
> >--- /dev/null
> >+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ipmi/aspeed,ast2400-kcs-bmc.yaml
> >@@ -0,0 +1,92 @@
> >+# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause)
> >+%YAML 1.2
> >+---
> >+$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/ipmi/aspeed,ast2400-kcs-bmc.yaml
> >+$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml
> >+
> >+title: ASPEED BMC KCS Devices
> >+
> >+maintainers:
> >+  - Andrew Jeffery <andrew@xxxxxxxx>
> >+
> >+description: |
> >+  The Aspeed BMC SoCs typically use the Keyboard-Controller-Style (KCS)
> >+  interfaces on the LPC bus for in-band IPMI communication with their host.
> >+
> >+properties:
> >+  compatible:
> >+    oneOf:
> >+      - description: Channel ID derived from reg
> >+        items:
> >+          enum:
> >+            - aspeed,ast2400-kcs-bmc-v2
> >+            - aspeed,ast2500-kcs-bmc-v2
> >+            - aspeed,ast2600-kcs-bmc
> 
> Should this have a "-v2" suffix?

Well, that was kind of a matter of perspective. The 2600 compatible was 
added after we'd done the v2 of the binding for the 2400 and 2500 so it 
never needed correcting. But it is a case of "don't use the deprecated 
properties with the 2600 compatible".

I don't think a change is necessary?

Cheers,

Andrew