| Message ID | 4fbf026a-4878-cd65-55f7-7d992782b331@gmail.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [v9,1/2] dt-bindings: edac: arm-dmc520.txt | expand |
On Wed, 15 Jan 2020 06:32:27 -0800, Shiping Ji wrote: > This is the device tree bindings for new EDAC driver dmc520_edac.c. > > Signed-off-by: Shiping Ji <shiping.linux@gmail.com> > Signed-off-by: Lei Wang <leiwang_git@outlook.com> > Reviewed-by: James Morse <james.morse@arm.com> > > --- > Changes in v9: > - Replaced the vendor specific interrupt-config property with interrupt-names > > --- > .../devicetree/bindings/edac/arm-dmc520.txt | 22 +++++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+) > create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/edac/arm-dmc520.txt > Reviewed-by: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>
On Wed, Jan 15, 2020 at 06:32:27AM -0800, Shiping Ji wrote: > This is the device tree bindings for new EDAC driver dmc520_edac.c. > > Signed-off-by: Shiping Ji <shiping.linux@gmail.com> > Signed-off-by: Lei Wang <leiwang_git@outlook.com> > Reviewed-by: James Morse <james.morse@arm.com> So for this patch, v2 had Rui Zhao as an author: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/BN7PR08MB5572B3388B2D7DC8F6C7F285AE4C0@BN7PR08MB5572.namprd08.prod.outlook.com v3 got Lei as an author: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/CY1PR0401MB1244062C1738B09D6100F202860A0@CY1PR0401MB1244.namprd04.prod.outlook.com and now it is you. So when you send next time, think about who's going to be the author. > + line numbers. The valid interrupt names are the followings: WARNING: 'followings' may be misspelled - perhaps 'following'? #51: FILE: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/edac/arm-dmc520.txt:10: + line numbers. The valid interrupt names are the followings: Please integrate scripts/checkpatch.pl into your patch creation workflow. Some of the warnings/errors *actually* make sense. Also, this patch throws this other checkpatch warning: WARNING: DT bindings should be in DT schema format. See: Documentation/devicetree/writing-schema.rst but since Rob reviewed it, I'm going to assume checkpatch is wrong here. Thx.
On 1/16/2020 3:39 PM, Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Wed, Jan 15, 2020 at 06:32:27AM -0800, Shiping Ji wrote: >> This is the device tree bindings for new EDAC driver dmc520_edac.c. >> >> Signed-off-by: Shiping Ji <shiping.linux@gmail.com> >> Signed-off-by: Lei Wang <leiwang_git@outlook.com> >> Reviewed-by: James Morse <james.morse@arm.com> > > So for this patch, v2 had Rui Zhao as an author: > > https://lkml.kernel.org/r/BN7PR08MB5572B3388B2D7DC8F6C7F285AE4C0@BN7PR08MB5572.namprd08.prod.outlook.com > > v3 got Lei as an author: > > https://lkml.kernel.org/r/CY1PR0401MB1244062C1738B09D6100F202860A0@CY1PR0401MB1244.namprd04.prod.outlook.com > > and now it is you. > > So when you send next time, think about who's going to be the author. I'll make sure Lei is the author (From:) in the next patches. >> + line numbers. The valid interrupt names are the followings: > > WARNING: 'followings' may be misspelled - perhaps 'following'? > #51: FILE: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/edac/arm-dmc520.txt:10: > + line numbers. The valid interrupt names are the followings: Yes, I think this can be fixed. I checked the scripts/spelling.txt and it does suggest using 'following' instead. > Please integrate scripts/checkpatch.pl into your patch creation > workflow. Some of the warnings/errors *actually* make sense. Yes, we will. > Also, this patch throws this other checkpatch warning: > > WARNING: DT bindings should be in DT schema format. See: Documentation/devicetree/writing-schema.rst > > but since Rob reviewed it, I'm going to assume checkpatch is wrong here. > > Thx. The check seems to warn the next file in .txt format which should be rather in the new .yaml format. We'll try to make one next. Thanks!
On Thu, Jan 16, 2020 at 5:39 PM Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de> wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 15, 2020 at 06:32:27AM -0800, Shiping Ji wrote: > > This is the device tree bindings for new EDAC driver dmc520_edac.c. > > > > Signed-off-by: Shiping Ji <shiping.linux@gmail.com> > > Signed-off-by: Lei Wang <leiwang_git@outlook.com> > > Reviewed-by: James Morse <james.morse@arm.com> > > So for this patch, v2 had Rui Zhao as an author: > > https://lkml.kernel.org/r/BN7PR08MB5572B3388B2D7DC8F6C7F285AE4C0@BN7PR08MB5572.namprd08.prod.outlook.com > > v3 got Lei as an author: > > https://lkml.kernel.org/r/CY1PR0401MB1244062C1738B09D6100F202860A0@CY1PR0401MB1244.namprd04.prod.outlook.com > > and now it is you. > > So when you send next time, think about who's going to be the author. > > > + line numbers. The valid interrupt names are the followings: > > WARNING: 'followings' may be misspelled - perhaps 'following'? > #51: FILE: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/edac/arm-dmc520.txt:10: > + line numbers. The valid interrupt names are the followings: > > Please integrate scripts/checkpatch.pl into your patch creation > workflow. Some of the warnings/errors *actually* make sense. > > Also, this patch throws this other checkpatch warning: > > WARNING: DT bindings should be in DT schema format. See: Documentation/devicetree/writing-schema.rst > > but since Rob reviewed it, I'm going to assume checkpatch is wrong here. Would be happy for a schema, but not going to ask for that on a v9. Rob
On 1/21/2020 9:53 AM, Rob Herring wrote:
> Would be happy for a schema, but not going to ask for that on a v9.
I drafted the schema, do you have some tools/instrutions to validate against the DTS? I want to make sure the schema is indeed correct.
Thanks!
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/edac/arm-dmc520.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/edac/arm-dmc520.txt new file mode 100644 index 000000000000..4a673f091918 --- /dev/null +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/edac/arm-dmc520.txt @@ -0,0 +1,22 @@ +* ARM DMC-520 EDAC node + +Required properties: +- compatible : "brcm,dmc-520", "arm,dmc-520". +- reg : Address range of the DMC-520 registers. +- interrupts : DMC-520 interrupt numbers. The example below specifies + two interrupt lines for dram_ecc_errc_int and + dram_ecc_errd_int. +- interrupt-names : This is an array of names corresponding to the interrupt + line numbers. The valid interrupt names are the followings: + ram_ecc_errc, ram_ecc_errd, dram_ecc_errc, dram_ecc_errd, + failed_access, failed_prog, link_err, temperature_event, + arch_fsm, phy_request + +Example: + +dmc0: dmc@200000 { + compatible = "brcm,dmc-520", "arm,dmc-520"; + reg = <0x200000 0x80000>; + interrupts = <0x0 0x349 0x4>, <0x0 0x34B 0x4>; + interrupt-names = "dram_ecc_errc", "dram_ecc_errd"; +};