MIPS: DTS: fix some findings by "make ci20_defconfig dt_binding_check dtbs_check"

arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: cpu@0: clock-names does not match any of the regexes: pinctrl-[0-9]+
From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mips/ingenic/ingenic,cpu.yaml
arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: cpu@1: clock-names does not match any of the regexes: pinctrl-[0-9]+
From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mips/ingenic/ingenic,cpu.yaml

Am 09.04.2022 um 13:07 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski <[email protected]>:

Quoted 4 lines · H. Nikolaus Schaller

arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: cpu@0: clock-names does not match any of the regexes: pinctrl-[0-9]+
From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mips/ingenic/ingenic,cpu.yaml
arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: cpu@1: clock-names does not match any of the regexes: pinctrl-[0-9]+
From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mips/ingenic/ingenic,cpu.yaml

No need to put the same warning twice (cpu index really does not matter). One warning is enough.

Fixing warnings is good, but what if the property should be there and the bindings are not correct? If you know the answer, please add it to the commit msg.

This applies to all your patches. Blind fixing of DTS warnings my produce incorrect results. :(

Reviewed-by Krzysztof Kozlowski <[email protected]>

Best regards,
Krzysztof

Hi Krzysztof,

Quoted 10 lines

Am 09.04.2022 um 13:07 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski <[email protected]>:

Quoted 4 lines · H. Nikolaus Schaller

arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: cpu@0: clock-names does not match any of the regexes: pinctrl-[0-9]+
From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mips/ingenic/ingenic,cpu.yaml
arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: cpu@1: clock-names does not match any of the regexes: pinctrl-[0-9]+
From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mips/ingenic/ingenic,cpu.yaml

No need to put the same warning twice (cpu index really does not matter). One warning is enough.

Well, how can you as a reviewer see immediately that dtbscheck warns for both instances and that they are both really fixed by the complete patch?

Assume there were only the first one mentioned and the second one forgotten to fix...

If it is not included here (completely), you have to run dtbscheck yourself to see that there are two instances involved. Or deduce it from looking into the source file.

In both cases much more work for you or other reviewers.

This is why I have kept this redundancy. One commit hunk for every warning line.

And it may only look redundant in the commit message, not in code where it would really hurt to have duplication.

Quoted 5 lines

Fixing warnings is good, but what if the property should be there and the bindings are not correct? If you know the answer, please add it to the commit msg.

It has of course been tested on real hardware.

There was only one case where the bindings seem to be wrong (patch 13/18).

And usually I simply assume such generic bindings are tested on many other platforms and therefore the reference. What are bindings and dtbscheck good for if we doubt them as DTS developers?

Quoted 3 lines

This applies to all your patches. Blind fixing of DTS warnings my produce incorrect results. :(

Every patch of this series has been tested on real hardware to have no negative side-effects.

arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: jz4780-cgu@10000000: $nodename:0: 'jz4780-cgu@10000000' does not match '^clock-controller@[0-9a-f]+$'
From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/ingenic,cgu.yaml

Signed-off-by H. Nikolaus Schaller <[email protected]>

---
 arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: timer@10002000: compatible: 'oneOf' conditional failed, one must be fixed:

	['ingenic,jz4780-tcu', 'ingenic,jz4770-tcu', 'simple-mfd'] is too long
	'ingenic,jz4780-tcu' is not one of ['ingenic,jz4740-tcu', 'ingenic,jz4725b-tcu', 'ingenic,jz4760-tcu', 'ingenic,x1000-tcu']
	'simple-mfd' was expected
	'ingenic,jz4760-tcu' was expected

From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/timer/ingenic,tcu.yaml

Review

Quoted 8 lines · H. Nikolaus Schaller

arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: timer@10002000: compatible:
'oneOf' conditional failed, one must be fixed:
['ingenic,jz4780-tcu', 'ingenic,jz4770-tcu', 'simple-mfd'] is too
long
'ingenic,jz4780-tcu' is not one of ['ingenic,jz4740-tcu',
'ingenic,jz4725b-tcu', 'ingenic,jz4760-tcu', 'ingenic,x1000-tcu']

(quoted diff) +0 -0

 	'simple-mfd' was expected
 	'ingenic,jz4760-tcu' was expected

Trim it a bit...

Quoted 2 lines

From schema:
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/timer/ingenic,tcu.yaml

You need to explain this. You're changing the effective compatible of the device and doing so based only on schema warning does not look enough. Please write real reason instead of this fat warning, e.g. that both devices are actually compatible and this has no real effect except schema checks.

Hi Krzysztof,

Quoted 15 lines · Krzysztof Kozlowski

Review

Quoted 8 lines · H. Nikolaus Schaller

arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: timer@10002000: compatible:
'oneOf' conditional failed, one must be fixed:
['ingenic,jz4780-tcu', 'ingenic,jz4770-tcu', 'simple-mfd'] is too
long
'ingenic,jz4780-tcu' is not one of ['ingenic,jz4740-tcu',
'ingenic,jz4725b-tcu', 'ingenic,jz4760-tcu', 'ingenic,x1000-tcu']

(quoted diff) +0 -0

 	'simple-mfd' was expected
 	'ingenic,jz4760-tcu' was expected

Trim it a bit...

Quoted 2 lines

From schema:
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/timer/ingenic,tcu.yaml

Quoted 7 lines

You need to explain this. You're changing the effective compatible of the device and doing so based only on schema warning does not look enough. Please write real reason instead of this fat warning, e.g. that
both devices are actually compatible and this has no real effect except
schema checks.

Well, if the schema says that it should use a particular fallback string, then that's what the DTS should use, right?

If making the DTS schema-compliant causes breakages, then that means the schema is wrong and should be fixed.

Am 09.04.2022 um 14:38 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski <[email protected]>:

Quoted 27 lines · Paul Cercueil

Hi Krzysztof,

Quoted 22 lines · Krzysztof Kozlowski

Quoted 8 lines · H. Nikolaus Schaller

arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: timer@10002000: compatible:
'oneOf' conditional failed, one must be fixed:

	['ingenic,jz4780-tcu', 'ingenic,jz4770-tcu', 'simple-mfd'] is too 
long
	'ingenic,jz4780-tcu' is not one of ['ingenic,jz4740-tcu', 

'ingenic,jz4725b-tcu', 'ingenic,jz4760-tcu', 'ingenic,x1000-tcu']
'simple-mfd' was expected
'ingenic,jz4760-tcu' was expected

Trim it a bit...

Quoted 2 lines

From schema:
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/timer/ingenic,tcu.yaml

You need to explain this. You're changing the effective compatible of the device and doing so based only on schema warning does not look enough. Please write real reason instead of this fat warning, e.g. that
both devices are actually compatible and this has no real effect except
schema checks.

Quoted 2 lines

Well, if the schema says that it should use a particular fallback string, then that's what the DTS should use, right?

Or the schema is wrong. :)

Quoted 2 lines

If making the DTS schema-compliant causes breakages, then that means the schema is wrong and should be fixed.

Exactly, so the commit needs a bit of explanation why one solution was chosen over the other. BTW, I am not saying that schema or DTS is wrong, just that commit is not explained enough.

Best regards,
Krzysztof

Am 09.04.2022 um 13:11 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski <[email protected]>:

Quoted 5 lines · H. Nikolaus Schaller

arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: timer@10002000: compatible: 'oneOf' conditional failed, one must be fixed:

	['ingenic,jz4780-tcu', 'ingenic,jz4770-tcu', 'simple-mfd'] is too long
	'ingenic,jz4780-tcu' is not one of ['ingenic,jz4740-tcu', 'ingenic,jz4725b-tcu', 'ingenic,jz4760-tcu', 'ingenic,x1000-tcu']
	'simple-mfd' was expected
	'ingenic,jz4760-tcu' was expected

Trim it a bit...

Quoted 1 line

From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/timer/ingenic,tcu.yaml

You need to explain this. You're changing the effective compatible of the device and doing so based only on schema warning does not look enough. Please write real reason instead of this fat warning, e.g. that both devices are actually compatible and this has no real effect except schema checks.

Quoted 13 lines

Am 09.04.2022 um 13:11 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski <[email protected]>:

Quoted 5 lines · H. Nikolaus Schaller

arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: timer@10002000: compatible: 'oneOf' conditional failed, one must be fixed:

	['ingenic,jz4780-tcu', 'ingenic,jz4770-tcu', 'simple-mfd'] is too long
	'ingenic,jz4780-tcu' is not one of ['ingenic,jz4740-tcu', 'ingenic,jz4725b-tcu', 'ingenic,jz4760-tcu', 'ingenic,x1000-tcu']
	'simple-mfd' was expected
	'ingenic,jz4760-tcu' was expected

Trim it a bit...

Quoted 7 lines

Quoted 1 line

From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/timer/ingenic,tcu.yaml

You need to explain this. You're changing the effective compatible of the device and doing so based only on schema warning does not look enough. Please write real reason instead of this fat warning, e.g. that both devices are actually compatible and this has no real effect except schema checks.

both use jz4740_soc_info / jz4770_soc_info and there is no ingenic,jz4780-tcu... So it doesn't change function, just makes it fit to the bindings.

We could solve it differently add ingenic,jz4780-tcu to bindings and the driver compatible table.

Am 09.04.2022 um 15:11 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski <[email protected]>:

Quoted 24 lines · H. Nikolaus Schaller

Quoted 13 lines

Am 09.04.2022 um 13:11 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski <[email protected]>:

Quoted 5 lines · H. Nikolaus Schaller

arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: timer@10002000: compatible: 'oneOf' conditional failed, one must be fixed:

	['ingenic,jz4780-tcu', 'ingenic,jz4770-tcu', 'simple-mfd'] is too long
	'ingenic,jz4780-tcu' is not one of ['ingenic,jz4740-tcu', 'ingenic,jz4725b-tcu', 'ingenic,jz4760-tcu', 'ingenic,x1000-tcu']
	'simple-mfd' was expected
	'ingenic,jz4760-tcu' was expected

Trim it a bit...

Quoted 7 lines

Quoted 1 line

From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/timer/ingenic,tcu.yaml

You need to explain this. You're changing the effective compatible of the device and doing so based only on schema warning does not look enough. Please write real reason instead of this fat warning, e.g. that both devices are actually compatible and this has no real effect except schema checks.

both use jz4740_soc_info / jz4770_soc_info and there is no ingenic,jz4780-tcu... So it doesn't change function, just makes it fit to the bindings.

Quoted 2 lines

We could solve it differently add ingenic,jz4780-tcu to bindings and the driver compatible table.

Just please use it in commit msg instead of or next to the warning. Don't focus on the bindings check but focus on actual hardware and its description.

Well, again, my assumption is that bindings and .yaml files formally describe the actual hardware components. And they have been reviewed.

So they have a higher level of authority than any current driver or .dts implementation. Unless there is evidence that the bindings are wrong.

I.e. if the bindings feel right why is there a need to argue for that?

It is like test-driven development model. There you have to write code that passes the tests. Not argue against the tests.

Am 09.04.2022 um 15:22 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski <[email protected]>:

Quoted 3 lines · H. Nikolaus Schaller

Well, again, my assumption is that bindings and .yaml files formally describe the actual hardware components. And they have been reviewed.

The bindings try to describe it. They are pretty often incomplete or might have mistakes.

The true reason of doing a change is not that some
tool tells you "do like this". The true reason is because the change properly describes hardware.

Quoted 3 lines

So they have a higher level of authority than any current driver or .dts implementation. Unless there is evidence that the bindings are wrong.

This is just a tool, not an authority.

Quoted 1 line

I.e. if the bindings feel right why is there a need to argue for that?

Because doing things "just because bindings told me" hides the true explanation and makes the code review, code management more difficult.

Later person will look at this and wonder why this was done like this. If you write "because some tool me" this is not a good help. But if you write "because hardware is like this exactly" this is proper comment.

Quoted 3 lines

It is like test-driven development model. There you have to write code that passes the tests. Not argue against the tests.

Again, don't focus on the tool... Tool is just a tool...

arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: timer@10002000: timer@e0:compatible: 'oneOf' conditional failed, one must be fixed:
['ingenic,jz4780-ost', 'ingenic,jz4770-ost'] is too long
'ingenic,jz4780-ost' is not one of ['ingenic,jz4725b-ost', 'ingenic,jz4760b-ost'] 'ingenic,jz4760-ost' was expected
'ingenic,jz4725b-ost' was expected
'ingenic,jz4760b-ost' was expected
From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/timer/ingenic,tcu.yaml

Signed-off-by H. Nikolaus Schaller <[email protected]>

---
 arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: pin-controller@10010000: $nodename:0: 'pin-controller@10010000' does not match '^(pinctrl|pinmux)(@[0-9a-f]+)?$'
From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/ingenic,pinctrl.yaml

Signed-off-by H. Nikolaus Schaller <[email protected]>

---
 arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi +0 -0

index 5f44cf004d473..b5299eaffb84a 100644

Am 09.04.2022 um 13:13 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski <[email protected]>:

Quoted 16 lines · H. Nikolaus Schaller

arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: pin-controller@10010000: $nodename:0: 'pin-controller@10010000' does not match '^(pinctrl|pinmux)(@[0-9a-f]+)?$'
From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/ingenic,pinctrl.yaml

Signed-off-by H. Nikolaus Schaller <[email protected]>

---
arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi | 2 +-

1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi +0 -0

index 5f44cf004d473..b5299eaffb84a 100644
@@ -155,7 +155,7 @@ rtc_dev: rtc@10003000 {
 		clock-names = "rtc";
 	};
 

arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi rtc_dev: rtc@10003000 { · line 158

Quoted 2 lines

arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi +1 -1

-	pinctrl: pin-controller@10010000 {
+	pinctrl: pinctrl@10010000 {

Do it once for all DTSes, not one file at a time. There are four more places with this.

Quoted 21 lines

Am 09.04.2022 um 13:13 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski <[email protected]>:

Quoted 16 lines · H. Nikolaus Schaller

arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: pin-controller@10010000: $nodename:0: 'pin-controller@10010000' does not match '^(pinctrl|pinmux)(@[0-9a-f]+)?$'
From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/ingenic,pinctrl.yaml

Signed-off-by H. Nikolaus Schaller <[email protected]>

---
arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi | 2 +-

1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi +0 -0

index 5f44cf004d473..b5299eaffb84a 100644
@@ -155,7 +155,7 @@ rtc_dev: rtc@10003000 {
 		clock-names = "rtc";
 	};
 

Quoted 5 lines

arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi rtc_dev: rtc@10003000 { · line 158

Quoted 2 lines

arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi +1 -1

-	pinctrl: pin-controller@10010000 {
+	pinctrl: pinctrl@10010000 {

Do it once for all DTSes, not one file at a time. There are four more places with this.

Well, automation has no notion of "similarity" in this case to merge several patches.

And they are not related. Every one is based on a different .yaml schema file.

That in all cases the result looks similar comes from similar requirements by the schemata and has no inherent connection.

Am 09.04.2022 um 15:13 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski <[email protected]>:

Quoted 27 lines · H. Nikolaus Schaller

Quoted 26 lines

Am 09.04.2022 um 13:13 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski <[email protected]>:

Quoted 13 lines · H. Nikolaus Schaller

arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: pin-controller@10010000: $nodename:0: 'pin-controller@10010000' does not match '^(pinctrl|pinmux)(@[0-9a-f]+)?$'
From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/ingenic,pinctrl.yaml

Signed-off-by H. Nikolaus Schaller <[email protected]>

---
arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi | 2 +-

1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi +0 -0

index 5f44cf004d473..b5299eaffb84a 100644

arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi rtc_dev: rtc@10003000 { · line 158

Quoted 5 lines

arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi +1 -1

@@ -155,7 +155,7 @@ rtc_dev: rtc@10003000 {
 		clock-names = "rtc";
 	};
 
-	pinctrl: pin-controller@10010000 {
+	pinctrl: pinctrl@10010000 {

Do it once for all DTSes, not one file at a time. There are four more places with this.

Quoted 2 lines

Well, automation has no notion of "similarity" in this case to merge several patches.

What does that mean? One cannot create multiple patches and apply them?

Quoted 3 lines

And they are not related. Every one is based on a different .yaml schema file.

Which does not matter, because the name of the node does not matter. We enforce it in schema to makes things organized and easier in testing. This does not fix any real problem, just the problem we created by ourselves with schema.

Quoted 1 line

Quoted 2 lines

That in all cases the result looks similar comes from similar requirements by the schemata and has no inherent connection.

All schemas will require it, won't they? The same for arm...

Quoted 2 lines

What does that mean? One cannot create multiple patches and apply them?

This patch set was created by some automatic scripts. And they produce one patch per group of warnings.

But here you ask me to merge 4 unrelated topics into a single one.

Or do you mean something else?

Quoted 14 lines

Quoted 4 lines

And they are not related. Every one is based on a different .yaml schema file.

Which does not matter, because the name of the node does not matter. We enforce it in schema to makes things organized and easier in testing. This does not fix any real problem, just the problem we created by ourselves with schema.

Quoted 3 lines

That in all cases the result looks similar comes from similar requirements by the schemata and has no inherent connection.

Quoted 1 line

All schemas will require it, won't they? The same for arm...

We may be talking about different things here.

My understanding:
you ask me to merge 5/18, 8/18, 9/18, 12/18 because they contain "controller" in the node-name.

Right? If not then we must clarify that first.

Am 09.04.2022 um 15:24 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski <[email protected]>:

Quoted 3 lines · H. Nikolaus Schaller

Quoted 2 lines

What does that mean? One cannot create multiple patches and apply them?

Quoted 6 lines

This patch set was created by some automatic scripts. And they produce one patch per group of warnings.

But here you ask me to merge 4 unrelated topics into a single one.

Or do you mean something else?

You can edit a commit, right? git commit --amend? So where is the problem?

Quoted 19 lines

Quoted 12 lines

Quoted 5 lines

And they are not related. Every one is based on a different .yaml schema file.

Which does not matter, because the name of the node does not matter. We enforce it in schema to makes things organized and easier in testing. This does not fix any real problem, just the problem we created by ourselves with schema.

Quoted 1 line

Quoted 4 lines

Quoted 2 lines

That in all cases the result looks similar comes from similar requirements by the schemata and has no inherent connection.

All schemas will require it, won't they? The same for arm...

We may be talking about different things here.

Quoted 4 lines

My understanding:
you ask me to merge 5/18, 8/18, 9/18, 12/18 because they contain "controller" in the node-name.

Right? If not then we must clarify that first.

No. I ask you to fix all pin-controller cases, for entire MIPS, not just one.

And in one month one more. And then again one more.

Quoted 3 lines

No. I ask you to fix all pin-controller cases, for entire MIPS, not just one.

Oops. Nope. I am a volunteer and neither your employee nor slave.

Am 09.04.2022 um 15:46 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski <[email protected]>:

Quoted 4 lines · H. Nikolaus Schaller

Quoted 3 lines

No. I ask you to fix all pin-controller cases, for entire MIPS, not just one.

Quoted 1 line

Oops. Nope. I am a volunteer and neither your employee nor slave.

No one thinks differently and I am sorry that you felt it. Please accept my apologies, if you get different impression. You understand though the meaning of word "ask for something" and "order something" (the latter which I did not use).

I just asked.

Quoted 16 lines

Am 09.04.2022 um 15:46 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski <[email protected]>:

Quoted 5 lines · H. Nikolaus Schaller

Quoted 3 lines

No. I ask you to fix all pin-controller cases, for entire MIPS, not just one.

Oops. Nope. I am a volunteer and neither your employee nor slave.

No one thinks differently and I am sorry that you felt it. Please accept my apologies, if you get different impression. You understand though the meaning of word "ask for something" and "order something" (the latter which I did not use).

Quoted 1 line

I just asked.

Ok. Maybe english is not our mother language and we sometimes don't get the nuances right. Sorry if I understood that wrongly.

At least I now understand what you did suggest.

Doing the same change for treewide MIPS is beyond my capabilities since I can't easily test any compile setup. So far I only compile for CI20 and as far as I know every machine still needs its own config for MIPS (haven't checked recently). So I am not even sure if dtbscheck tells me all locations.

Am 09.04.2022 um 16:00 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski <[email protected]>:

Quoted 21 lines · H. Nikolaus Schaller

Quoted 9 lines

Am 09.04.2022 um 15:46 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski <[email protected]>:

Quoted 4 lines · H. Nikolaus Schaller

Quoted 3 lines

No. I ask you to fix all pin-controller cases, for entire MIPS, not just one.

Quoted 8 lines

Quoted 1 line

Oops. Nope. I am a volunteer and neither your employee nor slave.

No one thinks differently and I am sorry that you felt it. Please accept my apologies, if you get different impression. You understand though the meaning of word "ask for something" and "order something" (the latter which I did not use).

I just asked.

Ok. Maybe english is not our mother language and we sometimes don't get the nuances right. Sorry if I understood that wrongly.

Quoted 1 line

At least I now understand what you did suggest.

Yeah, probably I did not express my thoughts correctly.

I would like to state that I appreciate your work and I think it is important, even if I do not express it correctly. Please accept my apologies if I am bit harsh or impolite. That's not my intention.

Quoted 7 lines

Doing the same change for treewide MIPS is beyond my capabilities since I can't easily test any compile setup. So far I only compile for CI20 and as far as I know every machine still needs its own config for MIPS (haven't checked recently). So I am not even sure if dtbscheck tells me all locations.

OK, fair enough.

Best regards,
Krzysztof

arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: rtc@10003000: compatible: 'oneOf' conditional failed, one must be fixed:

	['ingenic,jz4780-rtc'] is too short
	'ingenic,jz4780-rtc' is not one of ['ingenic,jz4740-rtc', 'ingenic,jz4760-rtc']
	'ingenic,jz4725b-rtc' was expected
	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/ingenic,rtc.yaml

Am 09.04.2022 um 13:14 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski <[email protected]>:

Quoted 5 lines · H. Nikolaus Schaller

arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: rtc@10003000: compatible: 'oneOf' conditional failed, one must be fixed:

	['ingenic,jz4780-rtc'] is too short
	'ingenic,jz4780-rtc' is not one of ['ingenic,jz4740-rtc', 'ingenic,jz4760-rtc']
	'ingenic,jz4725b-rtc' was expected
	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/ingenic,rtc.yaml

Why? Maybe the schema is wrong. These devices might not be compatible.

arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: usb@13500000: compatible: 'oneOf' conditional failed, one must be fixed:
['ingenic,jz4780-otg', 'snps,dwc2'] is too long
['ingenic,jz4780-otg', 'snps,dwc2'] is too short
'brcm,bcm2835-usb' was expected
'hisilicon,hi6220-usb' was expected
'rockchip,rk3066-usb' was expected
'ingenic,jz4780-otg' is not one of ['rockchip,px30-usb', 'rockchip,rk3036-usb', 'rockchip,rk3188-usb', 'rockchip,rk3228-usb', 'rockchip,rk3288-usb', 'rockchip,rk3308-usb', 'rockchip,rk3328-usb', 'rockchip,rk3368-usb', 'rockchip,rv1108-usb'] 'lantiq,arx100-usb' was expected
'lantiq,xrx200-usb' was expected
'ingenic,jz4780-otg' is not one of ['amlogic,meson8-usb', 'amlogic,meson8b-usb', 'amlogic,meson-gxbb-usb', 'amlogic,meson-g12a-usb', 'intel,socfpga-agilex-hsotg']
'amcc,dwc-otg' was expected
'apm,apm82181-dwc-otg' was expected

'snps,dwc2' was expected
'st,stm32f4x9-fsotg' was expected
'st,stm32f4x9-hsotg' was expected
'st,stm32f7-hsotg' was expected
'st,stm32mp15-fsotg' was expected
'st,stm32mp15-hsotg' was expected
'samsung,s3c6400-hsotg' was expected
'intel,socfpga-agilex-hsotg' was expected

From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/dwc2.yaml

Signed-off-by H. Nikolaus Schaller <[email protected]>

---
 arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi +0 -0

index 2021836983c96..c5124459678b7 100644

Quoted 13 lines · H. Nikolaus Schaller

arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: usb@13500000: compatible:
'oneOf' conditional failed, one must be fixed:

(quoted diff) +0 -0

 	['ingenic,jz4780-otg', 'snps,dwc2'] is too long
 	['ingenic,jz4780-otg', 'snps,dwc2'] is too short
 	'brcm,bcm2835-usb' was expected
 	'hisilicon,hi6220-usb' was expected
 	'rockchip,rk3066-usb' was expected
 	'ingenic,jz4780-otg' is not one of ['rockchip,px30-usb', 

'rockchip,rk3036-usb', 'rockchip,rk3188-usb', 'rockchip,rk3228-usb', 'rockchip,rk3288-usb', 'rockchip,rk3308-usb', 'rockchip,rk3328-usb', 'rockchip,rk3368-usb', 'rockchip,rv1108-usb']

(quoted diff) +0 -0

 	'lantiq,arx100-usb' was expected
 	'lantiq,xrx200-usb' was expected
 	'ingenic,jz4780-otg' is not one of ['amlogic,meson8-usb', 

'amlogic,meson8b-usb', 'amlogic,meson-gxbb-usb', 'amlogic,meson-g12a-usb', 'intel,socfpga-agilex-hsotg']

Review

Quoted 10 lines

(quoted diff) +0 -0

 	'amcc,dwc-otg' was expected
 	'apm,apm82181-dwc-otg' was expected
 	'snps,dwc2' was expected
 	'st,stm32f4x9-fsotg' was expected
 	'st,stm32f4x9-hsotg' was expected
 	'st,stm32f7-hsotg' was expected
 	'st,stm32mp15-fsotg' was expected
 	'st,stm32mp15-hsotg' was expected
 	'samsung,s3c6400-hsotg' was expected
 	'intel,socfpga-agilex-hsotg' was expected

You really don't need to paste entire warning.

Quoted 15 lines

From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/dwc2.yaml

Signed-off-by H. Nikolaus Schaller <[email protected]>

---

  arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi | 2 +-
  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi
b/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi
index 2021836983c96..c5124459678b7 100644 --- a/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi +++ b/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi @@ -576,7 +576,7 @@ bch: bch@134d0000 {
};

Quoted 3 lines

otg: usb@13500000 {
- compatible = "ingenic,jz4780-otg", "snps,dwc2";
+ compatible = "snps,dwc2";

This looks wrong, the block usually should have a specific compatible. Please mention why it does not.

Am 09.04.2022 um 14:27 schrieb Paul Cercueil <[email protected]>:

Hi,

Quoted 22 lines · Krzysztof Kozlowski

Quoted 12 lines · H. Nikolaus Schaller

arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: usb@13500000: compatible: 'oneOf' conditional failed, one must be fixed:
['ingenic,jz4780-otg', 'snps,dwc2'] is too long
['ingenic,jz4780-otg', 'snps,dwc2'] is too short
'brcm,bcm2835-usb' was expected
'hisilicon,hi6220-usb' was expected
'rockchip,rk3066-usb' was expected
'ingenic,jz4780-otg' is not one of ['rockchip,px30-usb', 'rockchip,rk3036-usb', 'rockchip,rk3188-usb', 'rockchip,rk3228-usb', 'rockchip,rk3288-usb', 'rockchip,rk3308-usb', 'rockchip,rk3328-usb', 'rockchip,rk3368-usb', 'rockchip,rv1108-usb'] 'lantiq,arx100-usb' was expected
'lantiq,xrx200-usb' was expected
'ingenic,jz4780-otg' is not one of ['amlogic,meson8-usb', 'amlogic,meson8b-usb', 'amlogic,meson-gxbb-usb', 'amlogic,meson-g12a-usb', 'intel,socfpga-agilex-hsotg']
'amcc,dwc-otg' was expected
'apm,apm82181-dwc-otg' was expected

Quoted 8 lines

'snps,dwc2' was expected
'st,stm32f4x9-fsotg' was expected
'st,stm32f4x9-hsotg' was expected
'st,stm32f7-hsotg' was expected
'st,stm32mp15-fsotg' was expected
'st,stm32mp15-hsotg' was expected
'samsung,s3c6400-hsotg' was expected
'intel,socfpga-agilex-hsotg' was expected

You really don't need to paste entire warning.

Quoted 16 lines

Quoted 10 lines

From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/dwc2.yaml

Signed-off-by H. Nikolaus Schaller <[email protected]>

---
 arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi +0 -0

index 2021836983c96..c5124459678b7 100644

arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi bch: bch@134d0000 { · line 578

Quoted 4 lines

arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi +1 -1

@@ -576,7 +576,7 @@ bch: bch@134d0000 {
 	};
 	otg: usb@13500000 {
-		compatible = "ingenic,jz4780-otg", "snps,dwc2";
+		compatible = "snps,dwc2";

This looks wrong, the block usually should have a specific compatible. Please mention why it does not.

Agreed. The "snps,dwc2" should be a fallback string, otherwise there is no way to uniquely identify the JZ4780 implementation of the IP.

Quoted 3 lines

Quoted 1 line

Please mention why it does not.

Agreed. The "snps,dwc2" should be a fallback string, otherwise there is no way to uniquely identify the JZ4780 implementation of the IP.

Well, there is no specifc implementation and driver for it. So no need to uniquely identify it.

Am 09.04.2022 um 15:23 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski <[email protected]>:

On 09/04/2022 15:18, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
hould have a specific compatible.

Quoted 5 lines

Quoted 3 lines

Quoted 1 line

Please mention why it does not.

Agreed. The "snps,dwc2" should be a fallback string, otherwise there is no way to uniquely identify the JZ4780 implementation of the IP.

Well, there is no specifc implementation and driver for it. So no need to uniquely identify it.

Specific implementation and driver are not arguments here. This does not matter. It's really unrelated argument.

Bindings are not about implementation in Linux. Implementation can change, so bindings should also?

Quoted 12 lines

Am 09.04.2022 um 15:23 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski
<[email protected]>:

On 09/04/2022 15:18, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
hould have a specific compatible.

Quoted 5 lines

Quoted 4 lines

Quoted 1 line

Please mention why it does not.

Agreed. The "snps,dwc2" should be a fallback string, otherwise
there is no way to uniquely identify the JZ4780 implementation of the IP.

Quoted 6 lines

Quoted 2 lines

Well, there is no specifc implementation and driver for it. So no
need to uniquely identify it.

Specific implementation and driver are not arguments here. This
does not
matter. It's really unrelated argument.

The argumentation is in reverse: if there is no need for a specialized driver or implementation, why is there is a need to define a specialization.

Your argument was:
"there is no way to uniquely identify the JZ4780 implementation of the IP"

My question is:
"what do we need that for?"

Quoted 2 lines

Bindings are not about implementation in Linux. Implementation can change, so bindings should also?

No. Implementations should be agnostic.

Am 09.04.2022 um 13:15 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski <[email protected]>:

Quoted 12 lines · H. Nikolaus Schaller

arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: usb@13500000: compatible: 'oneOf' conditional failed, one must be fixed:
['ingenic,jz4780-otg', 'snps,dwc2'] is too long
['ingenic,jz4780-otg', 'snps,dwc2'] is too short
'brcm,bcm2835-usb' was expected
'hisilicon,hi6220-usb' was expected
'rockchip,rk3066-usb' was expected
'ingenic,jz4780-otg' is not one of ['rockchip,px30-usb', 'rockchip,rk3036-usb', 'rockchip,rk3188-usb', 'rockchip,rk3228-usb', 'rockchip,rk3288-usb', 'rockchip,rk3308-usb', 'rockchip,rk3328-usb', 'rockchip,rk3368-usb', 'rockchip,rv1108-usb'] 'lantiq,arx100-usb' was expected
'lantiq,xrx200-usb' was expected
'ingenic,jz4780-otg' is not one of ['amlogic,meson8-usb', 'amlogic,meson8b-usb', 'amlogic,meson-gxbb-usb', 'amlogic,meson-g12a-usb', 'intel,socfpga-agilex-hsotg']
'amcc,dwc-otg' was expected
'apm,apm82181-dwc-otg' was expected

Quoted 8 lines

'snps,dwc2' was expected
'st,stm32f4x9-fsotg' was expected
'st,stm32f4x9-hsotg' was expected
'st,stm32f7-hsotg' was expected
'st,stm32mp15-fsotg' was expected
'st,stm32mp15-hsotg' was expected
'samsung,s3c6400-hsotg' was expected
'intel,socfpga-agilex-hsotg' was expected

You really don't need to paste entire warning.

Quoted 14 lines

From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/dwc2.yaml

Signed-off-by H. Nikolaus Schaller <[email protected]>

---
arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi | 2 +-

1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi +0 -0

index 2021836983c96..c5124459678b7 100644
@@ -576,7 +576,7 @@ bch: bch@134d0000 {
 	};
 

arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi bch: bch@134d0000 { · line 579

Quoted 3 lines

arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi +1 -1

 	otg: usb@13500000 {
-		compatible = "ingenic,jz4780-otg", "snps,dwc2";
+		compatible = "snps,dwc2";

This looks wrong, the block usually should have a specific compatible. Please mention why it does not.

Quoted 3 lines

This looks wrong, the block usually should have a specific compatible. Please mention why it does not.

Well, I did not even have that idea that it could need an explanation.

There is no "ingenic,jz4780-otg" and none is needed here to make it work.

Therefore the generic "snps,dwc2" is sufficient.

Am 09.04.2022 um 15:15 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski <[email protected]>:

Quoted 1 line · H. Nikolaus Schaller

Quoted 1 line

Quoted 6 lines

Quoted 2 lines

This looks wrong, the block usually should have a specific compatible. Please mention why it does not.

Well, I did not even have that idea that it could need an explanation.

There is no "ingenic,jz4780-otg" and none is needed here to make it work.

Make it work in what terms? We talk about hardware description, right?

Quoted 3 lines

Therefore the generic "snps,dwc2" is sufficient.

No, you are mixing now driver behavior (is sufficient) with hardware description.

Most of licensed blocks require the specific compatible to differentiate it.

Quoted 6 lines

Am 09.04.2022 um 15:15 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski <[email protected]>:

Quoted 1 line · H. Nikolaus Schaller

Quoted 1 line

Quoted 8 lines

Quoted 6 lines

Quoted 2 lines

This looks wrong, the block usually should have a specific compatible. Please mention why it does not.

Well, I did not even have that idea that it could need an explanation.

There is no "ingenic,jz4780-otg" and none is needed here to make it work.

Make it work in what terms? We talk about hardware description, right?

Yes.

Quoted 2 lines

Quoted 2 lines

Quoted 4 lines

Quoted 1 line

Therefore the generic "snps,dwc2" is sufficient.

No, you are mixing now driver behavior (is sufficient) with hardware description.

No. "snps,dwc2" is a hardware description for a licensed block. Not a driver behavior.

Quoted 3 lines

Most of licensed blocks require the specific compatible to differentiate it.

If there is a need to differentiate.

Am 09.04.2022 um 15:44 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski <[email protected]>:

Quoted 21 lines · H. Nikolaus Schaller

Quoted 6 lines

Am 09.04.2022 um 15:15 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski <[email protected]>:

Quoted 1 line · H. Nikolaus Schaller

Quoted 1 line

Quoted 8 lines

Quoted 6 lines

Quoted 2 lines

This looks wrong, the block usually should have a specific compatible. Please mention why it does not.

Well, I did not even have that idea that it could need an explanation.

There is no "ingenic,jz4780-otg" and none is needed here to make it work.

Make it work in what terms? We talk about hardware description, right?

Yes.

Quoted 4 lines

Quoted 3 lines

Therefore the generic "snps,dwc2" is sufficient.

Quoted 5 lines

Quoted 2 lines

No, you are mixing now driver behavior (is sufficient) with hardware description.

No. "snps,dwc2" is a hardware description for a licensed block. Not a driver behavior.

snps,dwc2 matches the original block, not necessarily this implementation. Unless you are sure?

Quoted 6 lines

Quoted 4 lines

Most of licensed blocks require the specific compatible to differentiate it.

If there is a need to differentiate.

No, regardless whether there is a need currently, most of them have specific compatibles, because there are some minor differences. Even if difference is not visible from programming model or wiring, it might justify it's own specific compatible. For example because maybe once that tiny difference will require some changes.

Someone added the ingenic compatible, so why do you assume that one tool (bindings) is correct but other piece of code (using specific compatible) is not? You use the argument "bindings warning" which is not enough. Argument that blocks are 100% same, is good enough, if you are sure. Just use it in commit msg. But are you sure that these are the same? Same pins, same programming model (entire model, not used by Linux)?

Quoted 16 lines

Am 09.04.2022 um 15:44 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski <[email protected]>:

Quoted 12 lines · H. Nikolaus Schaller

Quoted 10 lines

Am 09.04.2022 um 15:15 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski <[email protected]>:

Quoted 5 lines · H. Nikolaus Schaller

Quoted 2 lines

This looks wrong, the block usually should have a specific compatible. Please mention why it does not.

Well, I did not even have that idea that it could need an explanation.

There is no "ingenic,jz4780-otg" and none is needed here to make it work.

Make it work in what terms? We talk about hardware description, right?

Yes.

Quoted 7 lines

Quoted 5 lines

Quoted 3 lines

Quoted 1 line

Therefore the generic "snps,dwc2" is sufficient.

No, you are mixing now driver behavior (is sufficient) with hardware description.

No. "snps,dwc2" is a hardware description for a licensed block. Not a driver behavior.

snps,dwc2 matches the original block, not necessarily this implementation. Unless you are sure?

I assume. Nobody has reported an issue without having any specific jz4780 driver in place. Well, that is only evidence, not bullet proof.

Quoted 9 lines

Quoted 3 lines

Quoted 2 lines

Most of licensed blocks require the specific compatible to differentiate it.

If there is a need to differentiate.

No, regardless whether there is a need currently, most of them have specific compatibles, because there are some minor differences. Even if difference is not visible from programming model or wiring, it might justify it's own specific compatible. For example because maybe once that tiny difference will require some changes.

Quoted 6 lines

Someone added the ingenic compatible, so why do you assume that one tool (bindings) is correct but other piece of code (using specific compatible) is not? You use the argument "bindings warning" which is not enough. Argument that blocks are 100% same, is good enough, if you are sure. Just use it in commit msg. But are you sure that these are the same? Same pins, same programming model (entire model, not used by Linux)?

The compatible ingenic,jz4780-otg was introduced in 158c774d3c64859e84dd20e04d5fb18c8d3d318e. Hence I have added Yanjie for clarification why he added it in the .dts and not in the bindings.

BR and thanks,
Nikolaus

Am 10.04.2022 um 18:32 schrieb Zhou Yanjie <[email protected]>:

Hi folks,

Quoted 35 lines · H. Nikolaus Schaller

Quoted 16 lines

Am 09.04.2022 um 15:44 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski <[email protected]>:

Quoted 12 lines · H. Nikolaus Schaller

Quoted 10 lines

Am 09.04.2022 um 15:15 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski <[email protected]>:

Quoted 5 lines · H. Nikolaus Schaller

Quoted 2 lines

This looks wrong, the block usually should have a specific compatible. Please mention why it does not.

Well, I did not even have that idea that it could need an explanation.

There is no "ingenic,jz4780-otg" and none is needed here to make it work.

Make it work in what terms? We talk about hardware description, right?

Yes.

Quoted 7 lines

Quoted 5 lines

Quoted 3 lines

Quoted 1 line

Therefore the generic "snps,dwc2" is sufficient.

No, you are mixing now driver behavior (is sufficient) with hardware description.

No. "snps,dwc2" is a hardware description for a licensed block. Not a driver behavior.

snps,dwc2 matches the original block, not necessarily this implementation. Unless you are sure?

I assume. Nobody has reported an issue without having any specific jz4780 driver in place. Well, that is only evidence, not bullet proof.

Quoted 9 lines

Quoted 3 lines

Quoted 2 lines

Most of licensed blocks require the specific compatible to differentiate it.

If there is a need to differentiate.

No, regardless whether there is a need currently, most of them have specific compatibles, because there are some minor differences. Even if difference is not visible from programming model or wiring, it might justify it's own specific compatible. For example because maybe once that tiny difference will require some changes.

Quoted 8 lines

Quoted 6 lines

Someone added the ingenic compatible, so why do you assume that one tool (bindings) is correct but other piece of code (using specific compatible) is not? You use the argument "bindings warning" which is not enough. Argument that blocks are 100% same, is good enough, if you are sure. Just use it in commit msg. But are you sure that these are the same? Same pins, same programming model (entire model, not used by Linux)?

The compatible ingenic,jz4780-otg was introduced in 158c774d3c64859e84dd20e04d5fb18c8d3d318e. Hence I have added Yanjie for clarification why he added it in the .dts and not in the bindings.

It's my fault, last year I made an OTG driver for Ingenic SoCs and sent it to the mailing list, and then I received some revision comments, but for some personal reasons I didn't continue to improve it.

I'll finish these modifications as soon as possible and send them out. Then after they merge into the mainline, this problem will be solved.

Hi,

Quoted 51 lines

Am 10.04.2022 um 18:32 schrieb Zhou Yanjie <[email protected]>:

Hi folks,

Quoted 33 lines · H. Nikolaus Schaller

Quoted 14 lines

Am 09.04.2022 um 15:44 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski <[email protected]>:

Quoted 11 lines · H. Nikolaus Schaller

Quoted 9 lines

Am 09.04.2022 um 15:15 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski <[email protected]>:

Quoted 5 lines · H. Nikolaus Schaller

Quoted 2 lines

This looks wrong, the block usually should have a specific compatible. Please mention why it does not.

Well, I did not even have that idea that it could need an explanation.

There is no "ingenic,jz4780-otg" and none is needed here to make it work.

Make it work in what terms? We talk about hardware description, right?

Yes.

Quoted 7 lines

Quoted 5 lines

Quoted 3 lines

Quoted 1 line

Therefore the generic "snps,dwc2" is sufficient.

No, you are mixing now driver behavior (is sufficient) with hardware description.

No. "snps,dwc2" is a hardware description for a licensed block. Not a driver behavior.

snps,dwc2 matches the original block, not necessarily this implementation. Unless you are sure?

I assume. Nobody has reported an issue without having any specific jz4780 driver in place. Well, that is only evidence, not bullet proof.

Quoted 9 lines

Quoted 3 lines

Quoted 2 lines

Most of licensed blocks require the specific compatible to differentiate it.

If there is a need to differentiate.

No, regardless whether there is a need currently, most of them have specific compatibles, because there are some minor differences. Even if difference is not visible from programming model or wiring, it might justify it's own specific compatible. For example because maybe once that tiny difference will require some changes.

Quoted 8 lines

Quoted 6 lines

Someone added the ingenic compatible, so why do you assume that one tool (bindings) is correct but other piece of code (using specific compatible) is not? You use the argument "bindings warning" which is not enough. Argument that blocks are 100% same, is good enough, if you are sure. Just use it in commit msg. But are you sure that these are the same? Same pins, same programming model (entire model, not used by Linux)?

The compatible ingenic,jz4780-otg was introduced in 158c774d3c64859e84dd20e04d5fb18c8d3d318e. Hence I have added Yanjie for clarification why he added it in the .dts and not in the bindings.

It's my fault, last year I made an OTG driver for Ingenic SoCs and sent it to the mailing list, and then I received some revision comments, but for some personal reasons I didn't continue to improve it.

Quoted 2 lines

I'll finish these modifications as soon as possible and send them out. Then after they merge into the mainline, this problem will be solved.

No need to apologize.

If you agree I can add "ingenic,jz4780-otg" to the schema file and keep the .dts in the v2 of my series.

And I'll add you to the list of reviewers, so you can please comment v2 if it is correct or if we are still missing something.

Best regards and thanks,
Nikolaus

Am 12.04.2022 um 11:49 schrieb Zhou Yanjie <[email protected]>:

Hi Nikolaus,

Quoted 3 lines · H. Nikolaus Schaller

Hi,

Quoted 2 lines

If you agree I can add "ingenic,jz4780-otg" to the schema file and keep the .dts in the v2 of my series.

Sure.

Or you can wait a bit, I plan to send out new patches later today, it contains "ingenic,jz4780-otg".

/Volumes/CaseSensitive/master/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: lcdc0@13050000: $nodename:0: 'lcdc0@13050000' does not match '^lcd-controller@[0-9a-f]+$'
From schema: /Volumes/CaseSensitive/master/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/ingenic,lcd.yaml
/Volumes/CaseSensitive/master/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: lcdc0@13050000: clock-names:0: 'lcd_pclk' was expected
From schema: /Volumes/CaseSensitive/master/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/ingenic,lcd.yaml
/Volumes/CaseSensitive/master/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: lcdc0@13050000: clock-names:1: 'lcd' was expected
From schema: /Volumes/CaseSensitive/master/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/ingenic,lcd.yaml

/Volumes/CaseSensitive/master/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: dma@13420000: $nodename:0: 'dma@13420000' does not match '^dma-controller(@.*)?$'
From schema: /Volumes/CaseSensitive/master/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dma/ingenic,dma.yaml

Signed-off-by H. Nikolaus Schaller <[email protected]>

---
 arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi +0 -0

index 8b95486c8afa7..dc88f9e813453 100644

arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10030000: 'dmas' is a required property
From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10030000: 'dma-names' is a required property
From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10031000: 'dmas' is a required property
From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10031000: 'dma-names' is a required property
From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10032000: 'dmas' is a required property
From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10032000: 'dma-names' is a required property
From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10033000: 'dmas' is a required property

From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10033000: 'dma-names' is a required property
From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10034000: 'dmas' is a required property
From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10034000: 'dma-names' is a required property
From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: i2c@10050000: 'dmas' is a required property

Am 09.04.2022 um 13:18 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski <[email protected]>:

Quoted 13 lines · H. Nikolaus Schaller

arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10030000: 'dmas' is a required property
From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10030000: 'dma-names' is a required property
From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10031000: 'dmas' is a required property
From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10031000: 'dma-names' is a required property
From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10032000: 'dmas' is a required property
From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10032000: 'dma-names' is a required property
From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10033000: 'dmas' is a required property

Quoted 8 lines

From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10033000: 'dma-names' is a required property
From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10034000: 'dmas' is a required property
From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10034000: 'dma-names' is a required property
From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: i2c@10050000: 'dmas' is a required property

All these warnings are the same two warnings...

Quoted 27 lines

Am 09.04.2022 um 13:18 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski <[email protected]>:

Quoted 21 lines · H. Nikolaus Schaller

arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10030000: 'dmas' is a required property
From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10030000: 'dma-names' is a required property
From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10031000: 'dmas' is a required property
From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10031000: 'dma-names' is a required property
From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10032000: 'dmas' is a required property
From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10032000: 'dma-names' is a required property
From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10033000: 'dmas' is a required property
From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10033000: 'dma-names' is a required property
From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10034000: 'dmas' is a required property
From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10034000: 'dma-names' is a required property
From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: i2c@10050000: 'dmas' is a required property

Quoted 1 line

All these warnings are the same two warnings...

See my earlier explanation that without them you can't verify by just reading commit message and diff that all existing warnings have been addressed.

Am 09.04.2022 um 15:16 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski <[email protected]>:

Quoted 27 lines · H. Nikolaus Schaller

Quoted 27 lines

Am 09.04.2022 um 13:18 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski <[email protected]>:

Quoted 21 lines · H. Nikolaus Schaller

arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10030000: 'dmas' is a required property
From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10030000: 'dma-names' is a required property
From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10031000: 'dmas' is a required property
From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10031000: 'dma-names' is a required property
From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10032000: 'dmas' is a required property
From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10032000: 'dma-names' is a required property
From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10033000: 'dmas' is a required property
From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10033000: 'dma-names' is a required property
From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10034000: 'dmas' is a required property
From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10034000: 'dma-names' is a required property
From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: i2c@10050000: 'dmas' is a required property

Quoted 4 lines

Quoted 1 line

All these warnings are the same two warnings...

See my earlier explanation that without them you can't verify by just reading commit message and diff that all existing warnings have been addressed.

Which does not make sense and there is no need... Automation does it (see Rob's tools). Don't make human life more difficult...

Quoted 3 lines

Which does not make sense and there is no need... Automation does it (see Rob's tools). Don't make human life more difficult...

Ok, you are right. If you apply this patch and then run dtbscheck again, there would be a warning left over.

But may I honestly ask why you review the commits and read the commit message at all? You could simply ignore it... And it would be easier for both of us to leave it completely to Rob's tools :)

Am 09.04.2022 um 15:28 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski <[email protected]>:

Quoted 7 lines · H. Nikolaus Schaller

Quoted 3 lines

Which does not make sense and there is no need... Automation does it (see Rob's tools). Don't make human life more difficult...

Ok, you are right. If you apply this patch and then run dtbscheck again, there would be a warning left over.

Quoted 4 lines

But may I honestly ask why you review the commits and read the commit message at all? You could simply ignore it... And it would be easier for both of us to leave it completely to Rob's tools :)

I am not reading it. :) It takes more effort to scroll to the actual contents.

Best regards,
Krzysztof

arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: nemc@13410000: $nodename:0: 'nemc@13410000' does not match '^memory-controller@[0-9a-f]+$'
From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/ingenic,nemc.yaml

Signed-off-by H. Nikolaus Schaller <[email protected]>

---
 arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

jz4780-nemc needs to be compatible to simple-mfd as well or we get

arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: memory-controller@13410000: compatible: 'oneOf' conditional failed, one must be fixed:
['ingenic,jz4780-nemc', 'simple-mfd'] is too long
'ingenic,jz4725b-nemc' was expected
'ingenic,jz4740-nemc' was expected
From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/ingenic,nemc.yaml

Signed-off-by H. Nikolaus Schaller <[email protected]>

---
 .../devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/ingenic,nemc.yaml    | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/ingenic,nemc.yaml +0 -0

index 24f9e19820282..3b1116588de3d 100644

Quoted 16 lines · H. Nikolaus Schaller

jz4780-nemc needs to be compatible to simple-mfd as well or we get

arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: memory-controller@13410000:
compatible: 'oneOf' conditional failed, one must be fixed:

(quoted diff) +0 -0

 	['ingenic,jz4780-nemc', 'simple-mfd'] is too long
 	'ingenic,jz4725b-nemc' was expected
 	'ingenic,jz4740-nemc' was expected
 	From schema: 

Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/ingenic,nemc.yaml

Signed-off-by H. Nikolaus Schaller <[email protected]>

---
.../devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/ingenic,nemc.yaml |
2 +-

  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

Quoted 13 lines

diff --git
a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/ingenic,nemc.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/ingenic,nemc.yaml
index 24f9e19820282..3b1116588de3d 100644
---
a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/ingenic,nemc.yaml
+++
b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/ingenic,nemc.yaml
@@ -17,7 +17,7 @@ properties:
oneOf:
- enum:
- ingenic,jz4740-nemc
- - ingenic,jz4780-nemc
+ - [ ingenic,jz4780-nemc, simple-mfd ]

This is not correct representation. If you really need simple-mfd, then this should be a separate item below oneOf.

The true question is whether you need simple-mfd. Isn't the binding (and the driver) expected to instantiate its children?

Quoted 3 lines

The true question is whether you need simple-mfd. Isn't the binding (and
the driver) expected to instantiate its children?

I can explain that one. There is the EFUSE controller located inside the nemc's memory area, and the two are pretty much unrelated, hence the "simple-mfd" compatible string.

Quoted 7 lines · Paul Cercueil

Quoted 3 lines

The true question is whether you need simple-mfd. Isn't the binding (and
the driver) expected to instantiate its children?

I can explain that one. There is the EFUSE controller located inside the nemc's memory area, and the two are pretty much unrelated, hence the "simple-mfd" compatible string.

I saw the efuse children and that's why I asked who is expected to populate them. You said that simple-mfd is required for this, I say no. It should work without simple-mfd...

I am kind of repeating myself but I really do not see the need of simple-mfd in the bindings.

Quoted 8 lines

I saw the efuse children and that's why I asked who is expected to populate them. You said that simple-mfd is required for this, I say no.
It should work without simple-mfd...

I am kind of repeating myself but I really do not see the need of simple-mfd in the bindings.

Well, it is a "simple MFD",

so I don't see why we can't use the
"simple-mfd" compatible. Why would we not want to use it?

Besides, if the nemc driver is responsible for populating the efuse device, that means the nemc driver must be enabled for the efuse to work, which is nonsense, the two IP blocks being unrelated.

Am 09.04.2022 um 13:26 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski <[email protected]>:

Quoted 13 lines · H. Nikolaus Schaller

jz4780-nemc needs to be compatible to simple-mfd as well or we get

arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: memory-controller@13410000: compatible: 'oneOf' conditional failed, one must be fixed:
['ingenic,jz4780-nemc', 'simple-mfd'] is too long
'ingenic,jz4725b-nemc' was expected
'ingenic,jz4740-nemc' was expected
From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/ingenic,nemc.yaml

Signed-off-by H. Nikolaus Schaller <[email protected]>

---
.../devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/ingenic,nemc.yaml | 2 +-

1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/ingenic,nemc.yaml properties: · line 20

Quoted 10 lines

Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/ingenic,nemc.yaml +1 -1

index 24f9e19820282..3b1116588de3d 100644
@@ -17,7 +17,7 @@ properties:
    oneOf:
      - enum:
          - 
-          - ingenic,jz4780-nemc
+          - [ , simple-mfd ]

This is not correct representation. If you really need simple-mfd, then this should be a separate item below oneOf.

The true question is whether you need simple-mfd. Isn't the binding (and the driver) expected to instantiate its children?

Quoted 18 lines

Am 09.04.2022 um 13:26 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski <[email protected]>:

Quoted 13 lines · H. Nikolaus Schaller

jz4780-nemc needs to be compatible to simple-mfd as well or we get

arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: memory-controller@13410000: compatible: 'oneOf' conditional failed, one must be fixed:
['ingenic,jz4780-nemc', 'simple-mfd'] is too long
'ingenic,jz4725b-nemc' was expected
'ingenic,jz4740-nemc' was expected
From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/ingenic,nemc.yaml

Signed-off-by H. Nikolaus Schaller <[email protected]>

---
.../devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/ingenic,nemc.yaml | 2 +-

1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

Quoted 13 lines

Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/ingenic,nemc.yaml properties: · line 20

Quoted 10 lines

Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/ingenic,nemc.yaml +1 -1

index 24f9e19820282..3b1116588de3d 100644
@@ -17,7 +17,7 @@ properties:
    oneOf:
      - enum:
          - 
-          - ingenic,jz4780-nemc
+          - [ , simple-mfd ]

This is not correct representation. If you really need simple-mfd, then this should be a separate item below oneOf.

Well, it is valid YAML syntax and seems to be accepted by dtbscheck.

Quoted 3 lines

The true question is whether you need simple-mfd. Isn't the binding (and the driver) expected to instantiate its children?

I had expected that but current ingenic,jz4780-nemc code doesn't.

On 09/04/2022 15:09, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:

Quoted 11 lines

Quoted 9 lines

Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/ingenic,nemc.yaml properties: · line 20

Quoted 6 lines

Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/ingenic,nemc.yaml +1 -1

@@ -17,7 +17,7 @@ properties:
    oneOf:
      - enum:
          - 
-          - ingenic,jz4780-nemc
+          - [ , simple-mfd ]

This is not correct representation. If you really need simple-mfd, then this should be a separate item below oneOf.

Well, it is valid YAML syntax and seems to be accepted by dtbscheck.

It's not how we code it. Please do not introduce inconsistent - even if valid - blocks.

Am 10.04.2022 um 17:35 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski <[email protected]>:

Quoted 1 line · Krzysztof Kozlowski

On 09/04/2022 15:09, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:

(...)

Quoted 10 lines

Quoted 10 lines

Quoted 9 lines

Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/ingenic,nemc.yaml properties: · line 20

Quoted 6 lines

Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/ingenic,nemc.yaml +1 -1

@@ -17,7 +17,7 @@ properties:
   oneOf:
     - enum:
         - 
-          - ingenic,jz4780-nemc
+          - [ , simple-mfd ]

This is not correct representation. If you really need simple-mfd, then this should be a separate item below oneOf.

Quoted 1 line

Quoted 1 line

Well, it is valid YAML syntax and seems to be accepted by dtbscheck.

Minor update:
Well, it is not a valid schema. Rob's checker now confirmed. If you run dt_bindings_check by yourself you will see the error:

properties:compatible:oneOf:0:enum:1: ['ingenic', 'jz4780-nemc',
'simple-mfd'] is not of type 'string'

Probably because enum expects string, not another enum (so enum inside enum is not correct).

If you do not see the error, you might be missing some packages (mentioned in writing-schema + yamllint for a different issue) or your dtschema is old.

jz4780-nemc needs to be compatible to simple-mfd as well or we get

arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: memory-controller@13410000: compatible: 'oneOf' conditional failed, one must be fixed:
['ingenic,jz4780-nemc', 'simple-mfd'] is too long
'ingenic,jz4725b-nemc' was expected
'ingenic,jz4740-nemc' was expected
From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/ingenic,nemc.yaml

Signed-off-by H. Nikolaus Schaller <[email protected]>

---
 .../devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/ingenic,nemc.yaml    | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: /: fixedregulator@0: 'anyOf' conditional failed, one must be fixed:
'reg' is a required property
'ranges' is a required property
From schema: python/site-packages/dtschema/schemas/root-node.yaml
arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: /: fixedregulator@1: 'anyOf' conditional failed, one must be fixed:
'reg' is a required property
'ranges' is a required property
From schema: python/site-packages/dtschema/schemas/root-node.yaml
arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: /: fixedregulator@2: 'anyOf' conditional failed, one must be fixed:
'reg' is a required property
'ranges' is a required property
From schema: python/site-packages/dtschema/schemas/root-node.yaml

Signed-off-by H. Nikolaus Schaller <[email protected]>

---
 arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dts | 6 +++---
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dts +0 -0

index cb5257d32b55e..c045c4f75895e 100644

arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: wifi@1: compatible: oneOf conditional failed, one must be fixed:
[brcm,bcm4330-fmac] is too short
brcm,bcm4329-fmac was expected
From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/wireless/brcm,bcm4329-fmac.yaml

Signed-off-by H. Nikolaus Schaller <[email protected]>

---
 arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dts | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: bluetooth: vcc-supply does not match any of the regexes: pinctrl-[0-9]+
From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/broadcom-bluetooth.yaml

Signed-off-by H. Nikolaus Schaller <[email protected]>

---
 arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dts | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dts +0 -0

index dc587b4b36009..8a120f9374331 100644

Am 09.04.2022 um 13:22 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski <[email protected]>:

Quoted 8 lines · H. Nikolaus Schaller

arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: bluetooth: vcc-supply does not match any of the regexes: pinctrl-[0-9]+
From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/broadcom-bluetooth.yaml

Signed-off-by H. Nikolaus Schaller <[email protected]>

---
arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dts | 2 +-

1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dts &uart2 { · line 210

Quoted 10 lines

arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dts +1 -1

index dc587b4b36009..8a120f9374331 100644
@@ -207,7 +207,7 @@ &uart2 {
 	bluetooth {
 		compatible = "brcm,bcm4330-bt";
 		reset-gpios = <&gpf 8 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>;
-		vcc-supply = <&wlan0_power>;
+		vbat-supply = <&wlan0_power>;

Could be also vddio...

Acked-by Krzysztof Kozlowski <[email protected]>

Best regards,
Krzysztof