[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <6feed165-8cd8-419c-ac86-f637adb79458@kernel.org>
Date: Tue, 21 May 2024 09:36:46 +0200
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
To: Eddie James <eajames@...ux.ibm.com>, linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org
Cc: devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
conor+dt@...nel.org, krzk+dt@...nel.org, robh@...nel.org,
andi.shyti@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] dt-bindings: i2c: i2c-fsi: Convert to json-schema
On 20/05/2024 16:56, Eddie James wrote:
>
> On 5/19/24 13:03, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 14/05/2024 22:54, Eddie James wrote:
>>
>>> +properties:
>>> + compatible:
>>> + enum:
>>> + - ibm,i2c-fsi
>>> +
>>> + reg:
>>> + items:
>>> + - description: FSI slave address
>>> +
>>> + "#address-cells":
>>> + const: 1
>>> +
>>> + "#size-cells":
>>> + const: 0
>>> +
>>> +patternProperties:
>>> + "^i2c(@.*)?":
>> Either you have or you have not unit addresses. Please fix the pattern.
>> Why is this so flexible? Do you want to deprecate i2c-bus in favor of
>> i2c? If so, then example should use new naming. I am fine with children
>> as i2c-bus, assuming this is allowed by dtschema. Did you actually test it?
>
>
> This is the exact pattern of the i2c-controller schema node name, which
> I thought would be good. I can make it more specific. But yes I tested
> it, i2c-bus works fine
i2c-controller schema is a generic schema, applicable to various cases,
including non-MMIO. You have here specific instances.
Best regards,
Krzysztof
Powered by blists - more mailing lists