lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Oct]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH 29/36] dt-bindings: arm: Convert Renesas board/soc bindings to json-schema
On Mon, Oct 8, 2018 at 2:47 AM Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> wrote:
>
> Hi Rob,
>
> On Fri, Oct 5, 2018 at 6:59 PM Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org> wrote:
> > Convert Renesas SoC bindings to DT schema format using json-schema.
> >
> > Cc: Simon Horman <horms@verge.net.au>
> > Cc: Magnus Damm <magnus.damm@gmail.com>
> > Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
> > Cc: linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org
> > Cc: devicetree@vger.kernel.org
> > Signed-off-by: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>
>
> Thanks for your patch!
>
> Note that this will need a rebase, as more SoCs/boards have been added
> in -next.
>
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/shmobile.yaml
> > @@ -0,0 +1,205 @@
> > +# SPDX-License-Identifier: None
>
> The old file didn't have an SPDX header, so it was GPL-2.0, implicitly?

Right. I meant to update this with something. I'd prefer it be dual
licensed as these aren't just kernel files, but I don't really want to
try to gather permissions from all the copyright holders. And who is
the copyright holder when it is implicit? Everyone listed by git
blame?

> > +%YAML 1.2
> > +---
> > +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/bindings/arm/shmobile.yaml#
> > +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml#
> > +
> > +title: Renesas SH-Mobile, R-Mobile, and R-Car Platform Device Tree Bindings
> > +
> > +maintainers:
> > + - Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@glider.be>
>
> Simon Horman <horms@verge.net.au> (supporter:ARM/SHMOBILE ARM ARCHITECTURE)
> Magnus Damm <magnus.damm@gmail.com> (supporter:ARM/SHMOBILE ARM ARCHITECTURE)
>
> You had it right in the CC list, though...

I generated it here from git log rather get_maintainers.pl because
get_maintainers.pl just lists me for a bunch of them.

> > + - description: RZ/G1M (R8A77430)
> > + items:
> > + - enum:
> > + # iWave Systems RZ/G1M Qseven Development Platform (iW-RainboW-G20D-Qseven)
> > + - iwave,g20d
> > + - const: iwave,g20m
> > + - const: renesas,r8a7743
> > +
> > + - items:
> > + - enum:
> > + # iWave Systems RZ/G1M Qseven System On Module (iW-RainboW-G20M-Qseven)
> > + - iwave,g20m
> > + - const: renesas,r8a7743
> > +
> > + - description: RZ/G1N (R8A77440)
> > + items:
> > + - enum:
> > + - renesas,sk-rzg1m # SK-RZG1M (YR8A77430S000BE)
>
> This board belongs under the RZ/G1M section above
> (see also the 7743 in the part number).

Indeed. Not sure how I screwed that one up.

> > + - const: renesas,r8a7744
>
> > + - description: Kingfisher (SBEV-RCAR-KF-M03)
> > + items:
> > + - const: shimafuji,kingfisher
> > + - enum:
> > + - renesas,h3ulcb
> > + - renesas,m3ulcb
> > + - enum:
> > + - renesas,r8a7795
> > + - renesas,r8a7796
>
> This looks a bit funny: all other entries have the "const" last, and
> use it for the
> SoC number. May be correct, though.
> To clarify, this is an extension board that can fit both the [HM]3ULCB
> boards (actually also the new M3NULCB, I think).

This being Kingfisher?

I wrote this based on dts files in the tree. There's 2 combinations that I see:

"shimafuji,kingfisher", "renesas,h3ulcb", "renesas,r8a7795"
"shimafuji,kingfisher", "renesas,m3ulcb", "renesas,r8a7796"

The schema allows 4 combinations (1 * 2 * 2). I have no idea if the
other combinations are possible. If not, then we could rewrite this as
2 entries with 3 const values each.

Rob

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-10-08 16:58    [W:0.132 / U:0.556 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site