Skip to contentSkip to conversation

dt-bindings: example-schema: Show example of dependentRequired

PATCH Superseded Krzysztof Kozlowski 2 participants 3 messages Nov 11 Device tree bindings

v1 of 2 Superseded Latest is v2 →

lore
Share & tools
lore

Krzysztof Kozlowski

author
#0 lore raw

PATCH 1/1 dt-bindings: example-schema: Show example of dependentRequired

dependentRequired is shorter and preferred form of conditional property requirement, over allOf:if:then: block, so document example usage.

Signed-off-by Krzysztof Kozlowski <[email protected]>
---
 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/example-schema.yaml | 8 ++++++++
 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/example-schema.yaml +8 -0
index b04f3cc4312c..0c78eda67a2e 100644
@@ -217,6 +217,14 @@ required:
   - interrupts
   - interrupt-controller
 
+# Properties might be required only if some other property is present.
+# dependentRequired is a shorter and preferred way to express this, instead of
+# if:then: block.
+dependentRequired:
+  # foo-gpios is not a required property, but if present, then foo-supply must
+  # be provided as well.
+  foo-gpios: [ foo-supply ]
+
 # if/then schema can be used to handle conditions on a property affecting
 # another property. A typical case is a specific 'compatible' value changes the
 # constraints on other properties.
Signature · 1 line
2.53.0
AI review
#1 lore raw
Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue to consider: - [Low] dt-bindings: example-schema: conflicting and duplicate dependentRequired example --

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue to consider:
- [Low] dt-bindings: example-schema: conflicting and duplicate dependentRequired example
--

commit a3f4513191420436a3b3975020d020b961833f59
Author: Krzysztof Kozlowski <[email protected]>

dt-bindings: example-schema: Show example of dependentRequired

This commit adds a dependentRequired example to example-schema.yaml to document the preferred way to express conditional property requirements.

Quoted 5 lines
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/example-schema.yaml +0 -0
index b04f3cc4312c0..0c78eda67a2e6 100644

Documentation/devicetree/bindings/example-schema.yaml required: · line 226

Quoted 10 lines
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/example-schema.yaml +7 -0
@@ -217,6 +217,14 @@ required:
   - interrupts
   - interrupt-controller
 
+# Properties might be required only if some other property is present.
+# dependentRequired is a shorter and preferred way to express this, instead of
+# if:then: block.
+dependentRequired:
+  # foo-gpios is not a required property, but if present, then foo-supply must
+  # be provided as well.
+  foo-gpios: [ foo-supply ]

[Severity: Low]
Does requiring foo-supply when foo-gpios is present conflict with the allOf conditional block right below?

Documentation/devicetree/bindings/example-schema.yaml:allOf:
then:
required:
- foo-supply
else:
# If otherwise the property is not allowed:
properties:
foo-supply: false

That block already makes foo-supply unconditionally required on vendor,soc2-ip and forbids foo-supply on all other compatibles, which makes it impossible to specify foo-gpios on any compatible other than vendor,soc2-ip.

Also, should this replace the existing dependencies block just above required (and the comment in allOf referring to dependencies) rather than leaving two top-level keywords in the example schema that demonstrate the same construct?

Signature · 1 line
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/[email protected]?part=1
author
#2 lore raw
Quoted 4 lines · On 11/11/2026 10:14, [email protected] wrote:

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue to consider:
- [Low] dt-bindings: example-schema: conflicting and duplicate dependentRequired example

I should choose different properties...

Best regards,
Krzysztof