Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: gpio: mpfs-gpio: allow parsing of hog child nodes.

[<Conor.Dooley@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 25/08/2022 13:10, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe
> 
> On 20/08/2022 23:41, Conor Dooley wrote:
>> From: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>
>> The SD card and eMMC on PolarFire SoC based dev boards are sometimes
>> statically muxed using a GPIO. To facilitate this, enable gpio-hog
>> child node properties.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>>   .../bindings/gpio/microchip,mpfs-gpio.yaml     | 18 ++++++++++++++++++
>>   1 file changed, 18 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/microchip,mpfs-gpio.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/microchip,mpfs-gpio.yaml
>> index 110651eafa70..6704a7a52cd0 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/microchip,mpfs-gpio.yaml
>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/microchip,mpfs-gpio.yaml
>> @@ -44,6 +44,24 @@ properties:
>>
>>     gpio-controller: true
>>
>> +patternProperties:
>> +  "^.+-hog(?:-[0-9]+)?$":
> 
> What is this pattern about: "(?:" ?

Me being a pedant I suppose. "()" is a capture while "(?:)" is a match.
However, it does seem like json-schema suggests using "()":
https://json-schema.org/understanding-json-schema/reference/regular_expressions.html

I don't mind & neither does the schema checker.

> 
>> +    type: object
>> +
>> +    properties:
>> +      gpio-hog: true
>> +      gpios: true
>> +      input: true
>> +      output-high: true
>> +      output-low: true
>> +      line-name: true
>> +
>> +    required:
>> +      - gpio-hog
>> +      - gpios
>> +
>> +    additionalProperties: false
> 
> Put it after type:object. Easier to read/find.

Sure.
Thanks,
Conor.