[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <c2740d66-b51f-efc2-6583-a69bde950c68@linaro.org>
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2023 18:01:27 +0100
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
To: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>
Cc: Yuji Ishikawa <yuji2.ishikawa@...hiba.co.jp>,
Hans Verkuil <hverkuil@...all.nl>,
Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org>,
Nobuhiro Iwamatsu <nobuhiro1.iwamatsu@...hiba.co.jp>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>, linux-media@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/6] dt-bindings: media: platform: visconti: Add
Toshiba Visconti Video Input Interface bindings
On 17/01/2023 16:58, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> Hi Krzysztof,
>
> On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 04:42:51PM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 17/01/2023 16:26, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
>>>
>>>> +
>>>> + clock-lanes:
>>>> + description: VIIF supports 1 clock line
>>>
>>> s/line/lane/
>>>
>>>> + const: 0
>>>
>>> I would also add
>>>
>>> clock-noncontinuous: true
>>> link-frequencies: true
>>>
>>> to indicate that the above two properties are used by this device.
>>
>> No, these are coming from other schema and there is never need to
>> mention some property to indicate it is more used than other case. None
>> of the bindings are created such way, so this should not be exception.
>
> There are some bindings that do so, but that may not be a good enough
> reason, as there's a chance I wrote those myself :-)
>
> I would have sworn that at some point in the past the schema wouldn't
> have validated the example with this omitted. I'm not sure if something
> changed or if I got this wrong.
You probably think about case when using additionalProperties:false,
where one has to explicitly list all valid properties. But not for
unevaluatedProperties:false.
>
> video-interfaces.yaml defines lots of properties applicable to
> endpoints. For a given device, those properties should be required
required:
- foo
> (easy, that's defined in the bindings), optional,
by default (with unevaluatedProperties:false)
or explicitly mention "foo: true (with additionalProperties:false)
> or forbidden. How do
foo: false (with unevaluatedProperties:false)
or by default (with additionalProperties:false)
> we differentiate between the latter two cases ?
Best regards,
Krzysztof
Powered by blists - more mailing lists