Le Wed, 18 May 2022 15:05:03 +0300, Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@xxxxxxxxx> a écrit : > On Tue, May 17, 2022 at 08:59:24PM -0500, Rob Herring wrote: > > On Wed, May 11, 2022 at 06:33:37PM +0300, Vladimir Oltean wrote: > > > On Wed, May 11, 2022 at 10:22:21AM -0500, Rob Herring wrote: > > > > > +patternProperties: > > > > > + "^ethernet-ports$": > > > > > > > > Move to 'properties', not a pattern. > > > > > > > > With that, > > > > > > > > Reviewed-by: Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > Even if it should have been "^(ethernet-)?ports$"? > > > > Why? Allowing 'ports' is for existing users. New ones don't need the > > variability and should use just 'ethernet-ports'. > > > > Rob > > Yeah, ok, somehow the memo that new DSA drivers shouldn't support "ports" > didn't reach me. They invariably will though, since the DSA framework is > the main parser of the property, and that is shared by both old and new > drivers. Should also the subnodes of "ethernet-ports" use the "ethernet-port@[0-9]*" naming ? Or keeping the existing pattern is ok (ie "^(ethernet-)?port@[0-4]$") ? Thanks, -- Clément Léger, Embedded Linux and Kernel engineer at Bootlin https://bootlin.com
