Message ID | 57bebf2f-af4c-b2d9-10e5-19e5104946fb@gmail.com |
---|---|
State | Changes Requested |
Headers | show |
Series | [v2,1/2] dt-bindings: mtd: partitions: Add binding for Sercomm parser | expand |
On 09/04/2022 14:26, Mikhail Zhilkin wrote: >> >> In any case this requires vendor prefix. > > I'm not sure that "scpart-id" is necessary here. "sercomm,sc-partitions" > is necessary. I'm going to add vendor prefix in a separate patch. Is this > ok? Yes. > > --- > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.yaml | 2 ++ > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.yaml > b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.yaml > index 01430973ecec..65ff22364fb3 100644 > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.yaml > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.yaml > @@ -1082,6 +1082,8 @@ patternProperties: > description: Sensirion AG > "^sensortek,.*": > description: Sensortek Technology Corporation > + "^sercomm,.*": > + description: Sercomm (Suzhou) Corporation > "^sff,.*": > description: Small Form Factor Committee > "^sgd,.*": > -- > >>> + >>> +required: >>> + - compatible >> Missing reg. > > reg isn't required. Parser can read partition offsets and sizes from > SC PART MAP table. Or do you mean something else? All is ok > without reg definition in "Example" (except the warns that reg property > is missing). reg might not be required for current implementation but it is required by devicetree for every node with unit address. Do you expect here nodes without unit addresses? >> Are you sure that you tested your bindings? You miss here address/size >> cells and children, so you should have big fat warning. >> >> Plus your DTS example has error and does not compile... > > Whole dts, for the real device (not for example), was tested many times. Yeah, I did not speak about whole DTS, but bindings and example in the bindings. > Thank you for your feedback! I checked the another examples and there > are no any warnings now. But I'm not yet sure that "properties" and > "required" are correct. > What do you think (or what else I have to read / check)? There is no way you tested the bindings. There are for sure warnings because it simply cannot be even compiled. The writing-schema.rst describes how to test it. Best regards, Krzysztof
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.yaml index 01430973ecec..65ff22364fb3 100644 --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.yaml +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.yaml @@ -1082,6 +1082,8 @@ patternProperties: description: Sensirion AG "^sensortek,.*": description: Sensortek Technology Corporation + "^sercomm,.*": + description: Sercomm (Suzhou) Corporation "^sff,.*": description: Small Form Factor Committee "^sgd,.*": -- >> + >> +required: >> + - compatible > Missing reg. reg isn't required. Parser can read partition offsets and sizes from SC PART MAP table. Or do you mean something else? All is ok without reg definition in "Example" (except the warns that reg property is missing). > Are you sure that you tested your bindings? You miss here address/size > cells and children, so you should have big fat warning. > > Plus your DTS example has error and does not compile... Whole dts, for the real device (not for example), was tested many times. Thank you for your feedback! I checked the another examples and there are no any warnings now. But I'm not yet sure that "properties" and "required" are correct. What do you think (or what else I have to read / check)? --- .../mtd/partitions/sercomm,sc-partitions.yaml | 70 +++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 70 insertions(+) create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mtd/partitions/sercomm,sc-partitions.yaml diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mtd/partitions/sercomm,sc-partitions.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mtd/partitions/sercomm,sc-partitions.yaml new file mode 100644 index 000000000000..cb171a0383aa --- /dev/null