> Am 09.04.2022 um 15:11 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx>: > > On 09/04/2022 15:03, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote: >> >> >>> Am 09.04.2022 um 13:11 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx>: >>> >>> On 08/04/2022 20:37, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote: >>>> arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: timer@10002000: compatible: 'oneOf' conditional failed, one must be fixed: >>>> ['ingenic,jz4780-tcu', 'ingenic,jz4770-tcu', 'simple-mfd'] is too long >>>> 'ingenic,jz4780-tcu' is not one of ['ingenic,jz4740-tcu', 'ingenic,jz4725b-tcu', 'ingenic,jz4760-tcu', 'ingenic,x1000-tcu'] >>>> 'simple-mfd' was expected >>>> 'ingenic,jz4760-tcu' was expected >>> >>> Trim it a bit... >>> >>>> From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/timer/ingenic,tcu.yaml >>> >>> You need to explain this. You're changing the effective compatible of >>> the device and doing so based only on schema warning does not look >>> enough. Please write real reason instead of this fat warning, e.g. that >>> both devices are actually compatible and this has no real effect except >>> schema checks. >> >> both use jz4740_soc_info / jz4770_soc_info and there is no ingenic,jz4780-tcu... >> So it doesn't change function, just makes it fit to the bindings. >> >> We could solve it differently add ingenic,jz4780-tcu to bindings and the >> driver compatible table. > > Just please use it in commit msg instead of or next to the warning. > Don't focus on the bindings check but focus on actual hardware and its > description. Well, again, my assumption is that bindings and .yaml files formally describe the actual hardware components. And they have been reviewed. So they have a higher level of authority than any current driver or .dts implementation. Unless there is evidence that the bindings are wrong. I.e. if the bindings feel right why is there a need to argue for that? It is like test-driven development model. There you have to write code that passes the tests. Not argue against the tests. BR and thanks, Nikolaus
