On 12/02/2024 09:50, Jacopo Mondi wrote:
>>> +properties:
>>> + compatible:
>>> + const: raspberrypi,pispbe
>>
>> Nothing more specific? No model name, no version? It's quite generic
>> compatible which in general should not be allowed. I would assume that
>> at least version of Pi could denote some sort of a model... unless
>> version is detectable?
>>
>
> The driver matches on a version register and that should be enough to
> handle quirks which are specific to an IP revision in the driver
> itself.
>
> Considering how minimal the integration with the SoC is (one clock, one
> interrupt and one optional iommu reference) even if we'll get future
> revisions of the SoC I don't think there will be any need to match on
> a dedicated compatible for bindings-validation purposes.
>
> However I understand that to be future-proof it's good practice to
> allow a more flexible scheme, so we can have a generic fallback and a
> revision-specific entry.
>
> Would
>
> compatible:
> items:
> - enum:
> - raspberrypi,pipspbe-bcm2712
bcm2712 is manufactured by Broadcom, not Raspberry Pi, so it should be
rather Pi model?
> - const: raspberrypi,pispbe
>
> do in this case ?
>
> Also, let's see what RPi think as they are certainly more informed
> than me on what a good revision-specific match could be
I am fine with auto-detection, though.
...
>>> +
>>> +examples:
>>> + - |
>>> + #include <dt-bindings/interrupt-controller/arm-gic.h>
>>> +
>>> + rpi1 {
>>
>> soc {
>>
>
> Are you sure ? This will only ever live in the 'rp1' node.
What is "rp1" node? Does not look like a generic name.
>
>>> + #address-cells = <2>;
>>> + #size-cells = <2>;
>>> +
>>> + isp: pisp_be@880000 {
>>
>> Node names should be generic. See also an explanation and list of
>> examples (not exhaustive) in DT specification:
>> https://devicetree-specification.readthedocs.io/en/latest/chapter2-devicetree-basics.html#generic-names-recommendation
>> so: isp@
>>
>> and drop unused label
>
> ok
>
> Thanks
> j
>
> PS:
> on v6.8-rc1 I'm seeing
>
> LINT Documentation/devicetree/bindings
> usage: yamllint [-h] [-] [-c CONFIG_FILE | -d CONFIG_DATA] [--list-files]
> [-f {parsable,standard,colored,github,auto}] [-s] [--no-warnings] [-v]
> [FILE_OR_DIR ...]
>
> when running dt_binding_check
>
> My setup should be reasonably up-to-date, is it me only seeing this ?
I think you need to update your yamllint.
Best regards,
Krzysztof
