On Thu, Oct 10, 2019 at 02:33:56PM -0500, Rob Herring wrote: > On Wed, Oct 02, 2019 at 06:43:08PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > > Convert Samsung Exynos SYSRAM bindings to DT schema format using > > json-schema. > > > > Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > --- > > > > Changes since v2: > > 1. Use sram as name of node in example. > > > > Changes since v1: > > 1. Indent example with four spaces (more readable). > > --- > > .../devicetree/bindings/sram/samsung-sram.txt | 38 ------------ > > .../bindings/sram/samsung-sram.yaml | 58 +++++++++++++++++++ > > MAINTAINERS | 2 +- > > 3 files changed, 59 insertions(+), 39 deletions(-) > > delete mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sram/samsung-sram.txt > > create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sram/samsung-sram.yaml > > > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sram/samsung-sram.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sram/samsung-sram.yaml > > new file mode 100644 > > index 000000000000..3e77c434ecca > > --- /dev/null > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sram/samsung-sram.yaml > > @@ -0,0 +1,58 @@ > > +# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 > > +%YAML 1.2 > > +--- > > +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/sram/samsung-sram.yaml# > > +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml# > > + > > +title: Samsung Exynos SoC SYSRAM for SMP bringup > > + > > +maintainers: > > + - Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@xxxxxxxxxx> > > + > > +description: |+ > > + Samsung SMP-capable Exynos SoCs use part of the SYSRAM for the bringup > > + of the secondary cores. Once the core gets powered up it executes the > > + code that is residing at some specific location of the SYSRAM. > > + > > + Therefore reserved section sub-nodes have to be added to the mmio-sram > > + declaration. These nodes are of two types depending upon secure or > > + non-secure execution environment. > > + > > +allOf: > > + - $ref: "sram.yaml#" > > + > > +properties: > > + $nodename: > > + pattern: "^sysram(@.*)?" > > As you are renaming all the node names, this will no longer work. If you > change it to 'sram', that's going to match others, but would still work > as long as the child node names are unique to Samsung. If you change > them to '*-sram' then, you'd have to come up with something else. That > probably means using 'compatible' strings. At that point, it's kind of > silly to just be validating what your are using to select the schema. It > may be better to just add the compatible strings into sram.yaml if > that's the only difference. You're right. I'll move them to sram.yaml and maybe add also example. Best regards, Krzysztof
