On Fri, May 21, 2021 at 12:23:47PM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > Hi Linus, > > On Fri, May 21, 2021 at 12:04 PM Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Fri, May 21, 2021 at 9:54 AM Geert Uytterhoeven > > <geert+renesas@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Convert the PCF857x-compatible I/O expanders Device Tree binding > > > documentation to json-schema. > > > > > > Document missing compatible values, properties, and gpio hogs. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > (...) > > > Perhaps the "ti,pcf8575" construct should be removed, and the few users > > > fixed instead? > > > > You would rather list it as deprecated I think? > > It is ABI... > > All DTS files use the "nxp,pcf8575" fallback, except for > arch/x86/platform/ce4100/falconfalls.dts. > The latter ain't working with Linux, as the Linux driver doesn't > match against "ti,pcf8575"... Perhaps can it just be removed? > > > > + gpio-controller: true > > > > So this is implicitly using the generic schema in > > /dtschema/schemas/gpio/gpio.yaml > > if you leave it out: > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/nxp,pcf8575.yaml: ignoring, > error in schema: properties > warning: no schema found in file: > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/nxp,pcf8575.yaml > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/nxp,pcf8575.yaml: > properties: 'gpio-controller' is a dependency of '#gpio-cells' > from schema $id: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/gpios.yaml# > > > > + lines-initial-states: > > > + $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/uint32 > > > + description: > > > + Bitmask that specifies the initial state of each line. > > > + When a bit is set to zero, the corresponding line will be initialized to > > > + the input (pulled-up) state. > > > + When the bit is set to one, the line will be initialized to the > > > + low-level output state. > > > + If the property is not specified all lines will be initialized to the > > > + input state. > > > > Is this something we standardized or something that should > > actually be a custom "nxp," property we just missed it? > > (Looks like the latter... oh well, now it is there.) > > Too late for an "nxp," prefix. > See the NOTE in drivers/gpio/gpio-pcf857x.c: > > /* NOTE: these chips have strange "quasi-bidirectional" I/O pins. > * We can't actually know whether a pin is configured (a) as output > * and driving the signal low, or (b) as input and reporting a low > * value ... without knowing the last value written since the chip > * came out of reset (if any). We can't read the latched output. > * > * In short, the only reliable solution for setting up pin direction > * is to do it explicitly. The setup() method can do that, but it > * may cause transient glitching since it can't know the last value > * written (some pins may need to be driven low). > * > * Using n_latch avoids that trouble. When left initialized to zero, > * our software copy of the "latch" then matches the chip's all-ones > * reset state. Otherwise it flags pins to be driven low. > */ > > > > +patternProperties: > > > + "^(hog-[0-9]+|.+-hog(-[0-9]+)?)$": > > > + type: object > > > > But this is already in > > /dtschema/schemas/gpio/gpio-hog.yaml > > for nodename, isn't that where it properly belongs? > > > > I'm however confused here Rob will know what to do. This one is a bit odd. > If we leave this out, something still has to refer to it? > I see no other binding doing that... It's selected by 'gpio-hog' being present, but here you need to make sure that's the case. And I would hope you could define the node name to be just 1 of the 2 cases. Rob
