Hi Geert, geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote on Tue, 14 Feb 2023 16:22:15 +0100: > Hi Miquel, > > On Tue, Feb 14, 2023 at 3:44 PM Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > geert+renesas@xxxxxxxxx wrote on Tue, 14 Feb 2023 15:26:43 +0100: > > > SPI EEPROMs typically support both SPI Mode 0 (CPOL=CPHA=0) and Mode 3 > > > (CPOL=CPHA=1). However, using the latter is currently flagged as an > > > error by "make dtbs_check", e.g.: > > > > > > arch/arm/boot/dts/r8a7791-koelsch.dtb: flash@0: Unevaluated properties are not allowed ('spi-cpha', 'spi-cpol' were unexpected) > > > From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mtd/jedec,spi-nor.yaml > > > > > > Fix this by documenting support for CPOL=CPHA=1. > > > > > > Fixes: 233363aba72ac638 ("spi/panel: dt-bindings: drop CPHA and CPOL from common properties") > > > Signed-off-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@xxxxxxxxx> > > > --- > > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mtd/jedec,spi-nor.yaml | 7 +++++++ > > > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+) > > > > > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mtd/jedec,spi-nor.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mtd/jedec,spi-nor.yaml > > > index f86255ce13af0871..bb62ac4585822982 100644 > > > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mtd/jedec,spi-nor.yaml > > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mtd/jedec,spi-nor.yaml > > > @@ -76,6 +76,13 @@ properties: > > > If "broken-flash-reset" is present then having this property does not > > > make any difference. > > > > > > + spi-cpol: true > > > + spi-cpha: true > > > > I see that spi-cpol and spi-cpha are described in spi-controller.yaml > > which references spi-peripheral-props.yaml, but jedec,spi-nor.yaml > > only references spi-peripheral-props.yaml leading to spi-cpol and > > spi-cpha not being recognized as valid properties. > > > > Wouldn't it be cleaner to to have these two properties defined in > > spi-peripheral-props.yaml instead? > > They were moved out of that file by the commit referenced in the > Fixes: tag above, because they are not supported by all SPI targets. > It's the responsibility of the SPI target bindings to list what is supported. Oops, I overlooked that line. I actually see no point in constraining device trees on that regard, but, well, Krzysztof is the author, I believe he knows his stuff, so let's go for it. Reviewed-by: Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@xxxxxxxxxxx> Thanks, Miquèl