Message ID | 20200306124823.38C2A80307C4@mail.baikalelectronics.ru |
---|---|
State | Changes Requested, archived |
Headers | show |
Series | mips: Prepare MIPS-arch code for Baikal-T1 SoC support | expand |
Context | Check | Description |
---|---|---|
robh/checkpatch | success | |
robh/dt-meta-schema | success |
On Fri, Mar 6, 2020 at 6:48 AM <Sergey.Semin@baikalelectronics.ru> wrote: > > From: Serge Semin <Sergey.Semin@baikalelectronics.ru> > > Indeed there are a log of trivial devices amongst platform controllers, > IP-blocks, etc. If they satisfy the trivial devices bindings requirements > like consisting of a compatible field, an address and possibly an interrupt > line why not having them in the generic trivial-devices bindings file? NAK. Do you have some documentation on what a platform bus is? Last I checked, that's a Linux thing. If anything, we'd move toward getting rid of trivial-devices.yaml. For example, I'd like to start defining the node name which wouldn't work for trivial-devices.yaml unless we split by class. Rob
On Fri, Mar 06, 2020 at 07:56:51AM -0600, Rob Herring wrote: > On Fri, Mar 6, 2020 at 6:48 AM <Sergey.Semin@baikalelectronics.ru> wrote: > > > > From: Serge Semin <Sergey.Semin@baikalelectronics.ru> > > > > Indeed there are a log of trivial devices amongst platform controllers, > > IP-blocks, etc. If they satisfy the trivial devices bindings requirements > > like consisting of a compatible field, an address and possibly an interrupt > > line why not having them in the generic trivial-devices bindings file? > > NAK. > > Do you have some documentation on what a platform bus is? Last I > checked, that's a Linux thing. > > If anything, we'd move toward getting rid of trivial-devices.yaml. For > example, I'd like to start defining the node name which wouldn't work > for trivial-devices.yaml unless we split by class. > > Rob Hello Rob, Understood. I thought the trivial-devices bindings was to collect all the devices with simple bindings, but it turns out to be a stub for devices, which just aren't described by a dedicated bindings file. I'll resubmit the v2 version with no changes to the trivial-devices.yaml, but with CDMM/CPC dt-nodes having yaml-based bindings. Regards, -Sergey
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/trivial-devices.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/trivial-devices.yaml index 978de7d37c66..ce0149b4b6ed 100644 --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/trivial-devices.yaml +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/trivial-devices.yaml @@ -4,15 +4,15 @@ $id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/trivial-devices.yaml# $schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml# -title: Trivial I2C and SPI devices that have simple device tree bindings +title: Trivial I2C, SPI and platform devices having simple device tree bindings maintainers: - Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org> description: | - This is a list of trivial I2C and SPI devices that have simple device tree - bindings, consisting only of a compatible field, an address and possibly an - interrupt line. + This is a list of trivial I2C, SPI and platform devices that have simple + device tree bindings, consisting only of a compatible field, an address and + possibly an interrupt line. If a device needs more specific bindings, such as properties to describe some aspect of it, there needs to be a specific binding