[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20250204-eccentric-deer-of-felicity-02b7ee@krzk-bin>
Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2025 09:09:47 +0100
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
To: Chris Packham <chris.packham@...iedtelesis.co.nz>
Cc: lee@...nel.org, robh@...nel.org, krzk+dt@...nel.org,
conor+dt@...nel.org, andrew+netdev@...n.ch, davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com,
kuba@...nel.org, pabeni@...hat.com, tsbogend@...ha.franken.de,
hkallweit1@...il.com, linux@...linux.org.uk, sander@...nheule.net,
daniel@...rotopia.org, markus.stockhausen@....de, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-mips@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v6 1/6] dt-bindings: mfd: Add switch to RTL9300
On Tue, Feb 04, 2025 at 04:02:44PM +1300, Chris Packham wrote:
> Add bindings for the ethernet-switch portion of the RTL9300.
>
> Signed-off-by: Chris Packham <chris.packham@...iedtelesis.co.nz>
> ---
>
> Notes:
> Changes in v6:
> - New
> - I'd like to enforce the property being "ethernet-ports" but I see the
> generic binding allows "ports" as well. Can I just add ethernet-ports:
> type: object here or does by driver need to handle both "ports" and
> "ethernet-ports" (I see some do and some don't).
>
> .../bindings/mfd/realtek,rtl9301-switch.yaml | 16 +++++++++++++++-
> 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/realtek,rtl9301-switch.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/realtek,rtl9301-switch.yaml
> index f053303ab1e6..cb54abda5e6a 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/realtek,rtl9301-switch.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/realtek,rtl9301-switch.yaml
> @@ -14,6 +14,8 @@ description:
> number of different peripherals are accessed through a common register block,
> represented here as a syscon node.
>
> +$ref: /schemas/net/ethernet-switch.yaml#
> +
> properties:
> compatible:
> items:
> @@ -45,7 +47,7 @@ required:
> - compatible
> - reg
>
I don't get why this device receives now children without addresses.
Either your children have 'reg' or they do not. Mixing is a sign of a
mess, like this was never actually simple-mfd.
You would get this comment if you posted complete schema the first time.
Best regards,
Krzysztof
Powered by blists - more mailing lists