| Message ID | 20220425084800.2021-2-allen-kh.cheng@mediatek.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | dt-bindings: nvmem: mediatek: Convert mtk-efuse binding to YAML | expand |
On 25/04/2022 10:48, Allen-KH Cheng wrote: > Convert MediaTek eFuse devicetree binding to YAML. > > Signed-off-by: Allen-KH Cheng <allen-kh.cheng@mediatek.com> > --- > .../devicetree/bindings/nvmem/mtk,efuse.yaml | 70 +++++++++++++++++++ The vendor prefix is mediatek. Quoting my previous reply: Same comments as usual, so "vendor,device-name", e.g. "mediatek,efuse" if this is going to match all possible future MediaTek chips or "mediatek,mt7622-efuse" so keep it mediatek,efuse.yaml. > .../devicetree/bindings/nvmem/mtk-efuse.txt | 43 ------------ > 2 files changed, 70 insertions(+), 43 deletions(-) > create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/nvmem/mtk,efuse.yaml > delete mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/nvmem/mtk-efuse.txt > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/nvmem/mtk,efuse.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/nvmem/mtk,efuse.yaml > new file mode 100644 > index 000000000000..d056bc61dd5b > --- /dev/null > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/nvmem/mtk,efuse.yaml > @@ -0,0 +1,70 @@ > +# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0 OR BSD-2-Clause) > +%YAML 1.2 > +--- > +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/nvmem/mtk,efuse.yaml# > +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml# > + > +title: MediaTek eFuse device tree bindings No changes here. Please read my comments from your v1, don't ignore them. > + > +maintainers: > + - Lala Lin <lala.lin@mediatek.com> > + - Allen-KH Cheng <allen-kh.cheng@mediatek.com> > + > +allOf: > + - $ref: "nvmem.yaml#" > + > +properties: > + compatible: > + oneOf: > + - enum: > + - mediatek,mt8173-efuse > + - mediatek,efuse Still no changes... > + - items: > + - enum: > + - mediatek,mt7622-efuse > + - mediatek,mt7623-efuse > + - mediatek,mt8183-efuse > + - mediatek,mt8192-efuse > + - mediatek,mt8195-efuse > + - mediatek,mt8516-efuse > + - const: mediatek,efuse > + > + reg: > + maxItems: 1 > + > +patternProperties: > + "^.*@[0-9a-f]+$": > + type: object > + > + properties: > + reg: > + maxItems: 1 > + description: > + Offset and size in bytes within the storage device. > + > + required: > + - reg > + > + additionalProperties: false Still no changes. > + > +required: > + - compatible > + - reg > + > +unevaluatedProperties: false > + > +examples: > + - | > + Still no changes. Best regards, Krzysztof
Hi Krzysztof, On Mon, 2022-04-25 at 18:38 +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 25/04/2022 10:48, Allen-KH Cheng wrote: > > Convert MediaTek eFuse devicetree binding to YAML. > > > > Signed-off-by: Allen-KH Cheng <allen-kh.cheng@mediatek.com> > > --- > > .../devicetree/bindings/nvmem/mtk,efuse.yaml | 70 > > +++++++++++++++++++ > > The vendor prefix is mediatek. Quoting my previous reply: > > Same comments as usual, so "vendor,device-name", e.g. > "mediatek,efuse" > if this is going to match all possible future MediaTek chips or > "mediatek,mt7622-efuse" > > so keep it mediatek,efuse.yaml. > Yes, this can match can match current MTK chips. I will keep the file name. > > .../devicetree/bindings/nvmem/mtk-efuse.txt | 43 ------------ > > 2 files changed, 70 insertions(+), 43 deletions(-) > > create mode 100644 > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/nvmem/mtk,efuse.yaml > > delete mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/nvmem/mtk- > > efuse.txt > > > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/nvmem/mtk,efuse.yaml > > b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/nvmem/mtk,efuse.yaml > > new file mode 100644 > > index 000000000000..d056bc61dd5b > > --- /dev/null > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/nvmem/mtk,efuse.yaml > > @@ -0,0 +1,70 @@ > > +# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0 OR BSD-2-Clause) > > +%YAML 1.2 > > +--- > > +$id: > > https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://devicetree.org/schemas/nvmem/mtk,efuse.yaml*__;Iw!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!2opCfMBuhT3qG85-CIdLu3yviYqRI08FFlpx4vGOKsJLRgOilZDcv1zCy75fOabzogXR6t7cqOrvYULjSab_7sq-qA$ > > > > +$schema: > > https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml*__;Iw!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!2opCfMBuhT3qG85-CIdLu3yviYqRI08FFlpx4vGOKsJLRgOilZDcv1zCy75fOabzogXR6t7cqOrvYULjSaY9-kvJ9A$ > > > > + > > +title: MediaTek eFuse device tree bindings > > No changes here. Please read my comments from your v1, don't ignore > them. > My apologies for the mistake, I see the reply of v1 after I send v2. I will remove "device tree bindings". > > + > > +maintainers: > > + - Lala Lin <lala.lin@mediatek.com> > > + - Allen-KH Cheng <allen-kh.cheng@mediatek.com> > > + > > +allOf: > > + - $ref: "nvmem.yaml#" > > + > > +properties: > > + compatible: > > + oneOf: > > + - enum: > > + - mediatek,mt8173-efuse > > + - mediatek,efuse > > Still no changes... > I just want to confirm again. "Generic compatibles should not be used standalone" It seems we should remove mediatek,efuse and keep "mediatek,mt8173- efuse"in binding. have I got that right? > > + - items: > > + - enum: > > + - mediatek,mt7622-efuse > > + - mediatek,mt7623-efuse > > + - mediatek,mt8183-efuse > > + - mediatek,mt8192-efuse > > + - mediatek,mt8195-efuse > > + - mediatek,mt8516-efuse > > + - const: mediatek,efuse > > + > > + reg: > > + maxItems: 1 > > + > > +patternProperties: > > + "^.*@[0-9a-f]+$": > > + type: object > > + > > + properties: > > + reg: > > + maxItems: 1 > > + description: > > + Offset and size in bytes within the storage device. > > + > > + required: > > + - reg > > + > > + additionalProperties: false > > Still no changes. > Will remove this. Thanks, Allen > > + > > +required: > > + - compatible > > + - reg > > + > > +unevaluatedProperties: false > > + > > +examples: > > + - | > > + > > Still no changes. > > > Best regards, > Krzysztof
On 26/04/2022 08:23, allen-kh.cheng wrote: >>> +properties: >>> + compatible: >>> + oneOf: >>> + - enum: >>> + - mediatek,mt8173-efuse >>> + - mediatek,efuse >> >> Still no changes... >> > > I just want to confirm again. > > "Generic compatibles should not be used standalone" > > It seems we should remove mediatek,efuse and keep "mediatek,mt8173- > efuse"in binding. have I got that right? You should comment for which chipsets this compatible is and add a deprecated:true. In such case it cannot be part of enum but separate item in this oneOf. Best regards, Krzysztof
Hi Krzysztof, On Tue, 2022-04-26 at 08:31 +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 26/04/2022 08:23, allen-kh.cheng wrote: > > > > +properties: > > > > + compatible: > > > > + oneOf: > > > > + - enum: > > > > + - mediatek,mt8173-efuse > > > > + - mediatek,efuse > > > > > > Still no changes... > > > > > > > I just want to confirm again. > > > > "Generic compatibles should not be used standalone" > > > > It seems we should remove mediatek,efuse and keep "mediatek,mt8173- > > efuse"in binding. have I got that right? > > You should comment for which chipsets this compatible is and add a > deprecated:true. In such case it cannot be part of enum but separate > item in this oneOf. > > > Best regards, > Krzysztof Thanks for your suggestions, I would plan to send PATCHs as below, We have a PATCH 01 for current accepted dts properties: compatible: oneOf: - enum: - mediatek,efuse - mediatek,mt8173-efuse description: Only mt8173-efuse with generic fallback should be used - items: - enum: - mediatek,mt7622-efuse ... - const: mediatek,efuse Then add PATCH 02 to deprecate it properties: compatible: oneOf: - enum: - mediatek,efuse - mediatek,mt8173-efuse deprecated: true description: The mediatek,efuse is a generic fallback for other Chipset. Do not use the single compatible such as mediatek,efuse or mediatek,mt8173-efuse. It is deprecated. - items: - enum: - mediatek,mt7622-efuse ... - const: mediatek,efuse PATCH 03 for 8173 update mt8173.dtsi change compatible from "mediatek,mt8173-efuse" to "mediatek,mt8173- efuse", "mediatek,efuse"; Do you think it'd be okay ? Best regards, Allen
Hi Krzysztof, On Tue, 2022-04-26 at 08:31 +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 26/04/2022 08:23, allen-kh.cheng wrote: > > > > +properties: > > > > + compatible: > > > > + oneOf: > > > > + - enum: > > > > + - mediatek,mt8173-efuse > > > > + - mediatek,efuse > > > > > > Still no changes... > > > > > > > I just want to confirm again. > > > > "Generic compatibles should not be used standalone" > > > > It seems we should remove mediatek,efuse and keep "mediatek,mt8173- > > efuse"in binding. have I got that right? > > You should comment for which chipsets this compatible is and add a > deprecated:true. In such case it cannot be part of enum but separate > item in this oneOf. > > > Best regards, > Krzysztof Thanks for your suggestions, I would plan to send PATCHs as below, We have a PATCH 01 for current accepted dts properties: compatible: oneOf: - enum: - mediatek,efuse - mediatek,mt8173-efuse description: Only mt8173-efuse with generic fallback should be used - items: - enum: - mediatek,mt7622-efuse ... - const: mediatek,efuse Then add PATCH 02 to deprecate it properties: compatible: oneOf: - enum: - mediatek,efuse - mediatek,mt8173-efuse deprecated: true description: The mediatek,efuse is a generic fallback for other Chipset. Do not use the single compatible such as mediatek,efuse or mediatek,mt8173-efuse. It is deprecated. - items: - enum: - mediatek,mt7622-efuse ... - const: mediatek,efuse PATCH 03 for 8173 update mt8173.dtsi change compatible from "mediatek,mt8173-efuse" to "mediatek,mt8173- efuse", "mediatek,efuse"; Do you think it'd be okay ? Best regards, Allen
On 26/04/2022 12:02, allen-kh.cheng wrote: > Hi Krzysztof, > > On Tue, 2022-04-26 at 08:31 +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >> On 26/04/2022 08:23, allen-kh.cheng wrote: >>>>> +properties: >>>>> + compatible: >>>>> + oneOf: >>>>> + - enum: >>>>> + - mediatek,mt8173-efuse >>>>> + - mediatek,efuse >>>> >>>> Still no changes... >>>> >>> >>> I just want to confirm again. >>> >>> "Generic compatibles should not be used standalone" >>> >>> It seems we should remove mediatek,efuse and keep "mediatek,mt8173- >>> efuse"in binding. have I got that right? >> >> You should comment for which chipsets this compatible is and add a >> deprecated:true. In such case it cannot be part of enum but separate >> item in this oneOf. >> >> >> Best regards, >> Krzysztof > > Thanks for your suggestions, I would plan to send PATCHs as below, > > We have a PATCH 01 for current accepted dts > > properties: > compatible: > oneOf: > - enum: > - mediatek,efuse > > - mediatek,mt8173-efuse > description: Only mt8173-efuse > with generic fallback should be used > - items: > - enum: > > - mediatek,mt7622-efuse > ... > - const: mediatek,efuse > > Then add PATCH 02 to deprecate it > > properties: > compatible: > oneOf: > - enum: > - mediatek,efuse > - mediatek,mt8173-efuse > deprecated: true > description: The mediatek,efuse is a generic fallback for other > Chipset. Do not use the single compatible such as mediatek,efuse > or mediatek,mt8173-efuse. It is deprecated. > - items: > - enum: > - mediatek,mt7622-efuse > ... > - const: mediatek,efuse > > > PATCH 03 for 8173 > > update mt8173.dtsi > > change compatible from "mediatek,mt8173-efuse" to "mediatek,mt8173- > efuse", "mediatek,efuse"; > > > Do you think it'd be okay ? The idea is correct, but as I said it cannot be part of enum, but separate item in oneOf. You should see an error when testing your patch. Best regards, Krzysztof
Hi Krzysztof, On Tue, 2022-04-26 at 12:14 +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 26/04/2022 12:02, allen-kh.cheng wrote: > > Hi Krzysztof, > > > > On Tue, 2022-04-26 at 08:31 +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > > > On 26/04/2022 08:23, allen-kh.cheng wrote: > > > > > > +properties: > > > > > > + compatible: > > > > > > + oneOf: > > > > > > + - enum: > > > > > > + - mediatek,mt8173-efuse > > > > > > + - mediatek,efuse > > > > > > > > > > Still no changes... > > > > > > > > > > > > > I just want to confirm again. > > > > > > > > "Generic compatibles should not be used standalone" > > > > > > > > It seems we should remove mediatek,efuse and keep > > > > "mediatek,mt8173- > > > > efuse"in binding. have I got that right? > > > > > > You should comment for which chipsets this compatible is and add > > > a > > > deprecated:true. In such case it cannot be part of enum but > > > separate > > > item in this oneOf. > > > > > > > > > Best regards, > > > Krzysztof > > > > Thanks for your suggestions, I would plan to send PATCHs as below, > > > > We have a PATCH 01 for current accepted dts > > > > properties: > > compatible: > > oneOf: > > - enum: > > - mediatek,efuse > > > > - mediatek,mt8173-efuse > > description: Only mt8173-efuse > > with generic fallback should be used > > - items: > > - enum: > > > > - mediatek,mt7622-efuse > > ... > > - const: mediatek,efuse > > > > Then add PATCH 02 to deprecate it > > > > properties: > > compatible: > > oneOf: > > - enum: > > - mediatek,efuse > > - mediatek,mt8173-efuse > > deprecated: true > > description: The mediatek,efuse is a generic fallback for > > other > > Chipset. Do not use the single compatible such as mediatek,efuse > > or mediatek,mt8173-efuse. It is deprecated. > > - items: > > - enum: > > - mediatek,mt7622-efuse > > ... > > - const: mediatek,efuse > > > > > > PATCH 03 for 8173 > > > > update mt8173.dtsi > > > > change compatible from "mediatek,mt8173-efuse" to "mediatek,mt8173- > > efuse", "mediatek,efuse"; > > > > > > Do you think it'd be okay ? > > The idea is correct, but as I said it cannot be part of enum, but > separate item in oneOf. You should see an error when testing your > patch. > > > Best regards, > Krzysztof I have tested make DT_CHECKER_FLAGS=-m dt_binding_check DT_SCHEMA_FILES=Documentation/devicetree/bindings/nvmem/mtk,efuse.yaml make ARCH=arm64 dtbs_check DT_SCHEMA_FILES=Documentation/devicetree/bindings/nvmem/mtk,efuse.yaml Is the following correct as final version ? properties: compatible: oneOf: - const: mediatek,mt8173-efuse #Don't use this in new dts files deprecated: true - const: mediatek,efuse deprecated: true description: Please use mediatek,efuse as fallback. - items: - enum: - mediatek,mt7622-efuse - mediatek,mt7623-efuse - mediatek,mt8173-efuse - mediatek,mt8183-efuse - mediatek,mt8192-efuse - mediatek,mt8195-efuse - mediatek,mt8516-efuse - const: mediatek,efuse Thanks a lot, Allen
On 27/04/2022 11:28, allen-kh.cheng wrote: > Hi Krzysztof, > > On Tue, 2022-04-26 at 12:14 +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >> On 26/04/2022 12:02, allen-kh.cheng wrote: >>> Hi Krzysztof, >>> >>> On Tue, 2022-04-26 at 08:31 +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>>> On 26/04/2022 08:23, allen-kh.cheng wrote: >>>>>>> +properties: >>>>>>> + compatible: >>>>>>> + oneOf: >>>>>>> + - enum: >>>>>>> + - mediatek,mt8173-efuse >>>>>>> + - mediatek,efuse >>>>>> >>>>>> Still no changes... >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I just want to confirm again. >>>>> >>>>> "Generic compatibles should not be used standalone" >>>>> >>>>> It seems we should remove mediatek,efuse and keep >>>>> "mediatek,mt8173- >>>>> efuse"in binding. have I got that right? >>>> >>>> You should comment for which chipsets this compatible is and add >>>> a >>>> deprecated:true. In such case it cannot be part of enum but >>>> separate >>>> item in this oneOf. >>>> >>>> >>>> Best regards, >>>> Krzysztof >>> >>> Thanks for your suggestions, I would plan to send PATCHs as below, >>> >>> We have a PATCH 01 for current accepted dts >>> >>> properties: >>> compatible: >>> oneOf: >>> - enum: >>> - mediatek,efuse >>> >>> - mediatek,mt8173-efuse >>> description: Only mt8173-efuse >>> with generic fallback should be used >>> - items: >>> - enum: >>> >>> - mediatek,mt7622-efuse >>> ... >>> - const: mediatek,efuse >>> >>> Then add PATCH 02 to deprecate it >>> >>> properties: >>> compatible: >>> oneOf: >>> - enum: >>> - mediatek,efuse >>> - mediatek,mt8173-efuse >>> deprecated: true >>> description: The mediatek,efuse is a generic fallback for >>> other >>> Chipset. Do not use the single compatible such as mediatek,efuse >>> or mediatek,mt8173-efuse. It is deprecated. >>> - items: >>> - enum: >>> - mediatek,mt7622-efuse >>> ... >>> - const: mediatek,efuse >>> >>> >>> PATCH 03 for 8173 >>> >>> update mt8173.dtsi >>> >>> change compatible from "mediatek,mt8173-efuse" to "mediatek,mt8173- >>> efuse", "mediatek,efuse"; >>> >>> >>> Do you think it'd be okay ? >> >> The idea is correct, but as I said it cannot be part of enum, but >> separate item in oneOf. You should see an error when testing your >> patch. >> >> >> Best regards, >> Krzysztof > > I have tested > make DT_CHECKER_FLAGS=-m dt_binding_check > DT_SCHEMA_FILES=Documentation/devicetree/bindings/nvmem/mtk,efuse.yaml > > make ARCH=arm64 dtbs_check > DT_SCHEMA_FILES=Documentation/devicetree/bindings/nvmem/mtk,efuse.yaml > > Is the following correct as final version ? Almost :) > > properties: > compatible: > oneOf: > - const: mediatek,mt8173-efuse > #Don't use this in new dts files This compatible above is correct for mt8173, isn't it? > deprecated: true > - const: > mediatek,efuse > deprecated: true > description: > > Please use mediatek,efuse as fallback. Description does not match. This should be something like: "MediaTek efuse for MT8173. Deprecated, use mediatek,mt8173-efuse instead" Best regards, Krzysztof
Hi Krzysztof, On Wed, 2022-04-27 at 11:39 +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 27/04/2022 11:28, allen-kh.cheng wrote: > > Hi Krzysztof, > > > > On Tue, 2022-04-26 at 12:14 +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > > > On 26/04/2022 12:02, allen-kh.cheng wrote: > > > > Hi Krzysztof, > > > > > > > > On Tue, 2022-04-26 at 08:31 +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > > > > > On 26/04/2022 08:23, allen-kh.cheng wrote: > > > > > > > > +properties: > > > > > > > > + compatible: > > > > > > > > + oneOf: > > > > > > > > + - enum: > > > > > > > > + - mediatek,mt8173-efuse > > > > > > > > + - mediatek,efuse > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Still no changes... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I just want to confirm again. > > > > > > > > > > > > "Generic compatibles should not be used standalone" > > > > > > > > > > > > It seems we should remove mediatek,efuse and keep > > > > > > "mediatek,mt8173- > > > > > > efuse"in binding. have I got that right? > > > > > > > > > > You should comment for which chipsets this compatible is and > > > > > add > > > > > a > > > > > deprecated:true. In such case it cannot be part of enum but > > > > > separate > > > > > item in this oneOf. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > > Krzysztof > > > > > > > > Thanks for your suggestions, I would plan to send PATCHs as > > > > below, > > > > > > > > We have a PATCH 01 for current accepted dts > > > > > > > > properties: > > > > compatible: > > > > oneOf: > > > > - enum: > > > > - mediatek,efuse > > > > > > > > - mediatek,mt8173-efuse > > > > description: Only mt8173-efuse > > > > with generic fallback should be used > > > > - items: > > > > - enum: > > > > > > > > - mediatek,mt7622-efuse > > > > ... > > > > - const: mediatek,efuse > > > > > > > > Then add PATCH 02 to deprecate it > > > > > > > > properties: > > > > compatible: > > > > oneOf: > > > > - enum: > > > > - mediatek,efuse > > > > - mediatek,mt8173-efuse > > > > deprecated: true > > > > description: The mediatek,efuse is a generic fallback > > > > for > > > > other > > > > Chipset. Do not use the single compatible such as > > > > mediatek,efuse > > > > or mediatek,mt8173-efuse. It is deprecated. > > > > - items: > > > > - enum: > > > > - mediatek,mt7622-efuse > > > > ... > > > > - const: mediatek,efuse > > > > > > > > > > > > PATCH 03 for 8173 > > > > > > > > update mt8173.dtsi > > > > > > > > change compatible from "mediatek,mt8173-efuse" to > > > > "mediatek,mt8173- > > > > efuse", "mediatek,efuse"; > > > > > > > > > > > > Do you think it'd be okay ? > > > > > > The idea is correct, but as I said it cannot be part of enum, but > > > separate item in oneOf. You should see an error when testing your > > > patch. > > > > > > > > > Best regards, > > > Krzysztof > > > > I have tested > > make DT_CHECKER_FLAGS=-m dt_binding_check > > DT_SCHEMA_FILES=Documentation/devicetree/bindings/nvmem/mtk,efuse.y > > aml > > > > make ARCH=arm64 dtbs_check > > DT_SCHEMA_FILES=Documentation/devicetree/bindings/nvmem/mtk,efuse.y > > aml > > > > Is the following correct as final version ? > > Almost :) > > > > > properties: > > compatible: > > oneOf: > > - const: mediatek,mt8173-efuse > > #Don't use this in new dts files > > This compatible above is correct for mt8173, isn't it? > > > deprecated: true > > - const: > > mediatek,efuse > > deprecated: true > > description: > > > > Please use mediatek,efuse as fallback. > > Description does not match. This should be something like: > "MediaTek efuse for MT8173. Deprecated, use mediatek,mt8173-efuse > instead" > > > > Best regards, > Krzysztof I think there are two cases in mediatek efuse dirver now. Case 1, const: mediatek,efuse is deprecated. const: mediatek,mt8173-efuse is remained. All mediatek chipsets will use mediatek,mt8173-efuse as fallback. Case 2, const: mediatek,efuse is deprecated. const: mediatek,mt8173-efuse is deprecated. All mediatek chipsets(include ediatek,mt8173-efuse) will use mediatek,efuse as fallback. Which one do you think is better? Best regards, Allen
On 27/04/2022 12:00, allen-kh.cheng wrote: > I think there are two cases in mediatek efuse dirver now. > > Case 1, > const: mediatek,efuse is deprecated. > const: mediatek,mt8173-efuse is remained. All mediatek chipsets will > use mediatek,mt8173-efuse as fallback. > > Case 2, > const: mediatek,efuse is deprecated. > const: mediatek,mt8173-efuse is deprecated. > > All mediatek chipsets(include ediatek,mt8173-efuse) will use > mediatek,efuse as fallback. > > Which one do you think is better? Indeed, I forgot that mt8173 would also fallback to generic efuse. Indeed let's go with case 2, so your proposal before was correct. Best regards, Krzysztof
Hi Krzysztof, On Wed, 2022-04-27 at 15:53 +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 27/04/2022 12:00, allen-kh.cheng wrote: > > I think there are two cases in mediatek efuse dirver now. > > > > Case 1, > > const: mediatek,efuse is deprecated. > > const: mediatek,mt8173-efuse is remained. All mediatek chipsets > > will > > use mediatek,mt8173-efuse as fallback. > > > > Case 2, > > const: mediatek,efuse is deprecated. > > const: mediatek,mt8173-efuse is deprecated. > > > > All mediatek chipsets(include ediatek,mt8173-efuse) will use > > mediatek,efuse as fallback. > > > > Which one do you think is better? > > Indeed, I forgot that mt8173 would also fallback to generic efuse. > Indeed let's go with case 2, so your proposal before was correct. > > > Best regards, > Krzysztof Ok, thank you for your reply. I will repare v3 for those. Best regards, Allen
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/nvmem/mtk,efuse.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/nvmem/mtk,efuse.yaml new file mode 100644 index 000000000000..d056bc61dd5b --- /dev/null +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/nvmem/mtk,efuse.yaml @@ -0,0 +1,70 @@ +# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0 OR BSD-2-Clause) +%YAML 1.2 +--- +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/nvmem/mtk,efuse.yaml# +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml# + +title: MediaTek eFuse device tree bindings + +maintainers: + - Lala Lin <lala.lin@mediatek.com> + - Allen-KH Cheng <allen-kh.cheng@mediatek.com> + +allOf: + - $ref: "nvmem.yaml#" + +properties: + compatible: + oneOf: + - enum: + - mediatek,mt8173-efuse + - mediatek,efuse + - items: + - enum: + - mediatek,mt7622-efuse + - mediatek,mt7623-efuse + - mediatek,mt8183-efuse + - mediatek,mt8192-efuse + - mediatek,mt8195-efuse + - mediatek,mt8516-efuse + - const: mediatek,efuse + + reg: + maxItems: 1 + +patternProperties: + "^.*@[0-9a-f]+$": + type: object + + properties: + reg: + maxItems: 1 + description: + Offset and size in bytes within the storage device. + + required: + - reg + + additionalProperties: false + +required: + - compatible + - reg + +unevaluatedProperties: false + +examples: + - | + + efuse: efuse@10206000 { + compatible = "mediatek,mt8173-efuse"; + reg = <0x10206000 0x1000>; + #address-cells = <1>; + #size-cells = <1>; + + /* Data cells */ + thermal_calibration: calib@528 { + reg = <0x528 0xc>; + }; + }; +... diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/nvmem/mtk-efuse.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/nvmem/mtk-efuse.txt deleted file mode 100644 index 39d529599444..000000000000 --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/nvmem/mtk-efuse.txt +++ /dev/null @@ -1,43 +0,0 @@ -= Mediatek MTK-EFUSE device tree bindings = - -This binding is intended to represent MTK-EFUSE which is found in most Mediatek SOCs. - -Required properties: -- compatible: should be - "mediatek,mt7622-efuse", "mediatek,efuse": for MT7622 - "mediatek,mt7623-efuse", "mediatek,efuse": for MT7623 - "mediatek,mt8173-efuse" or "mediatek,efuse": for MT8173 - "mediatek,mt8192-efuse", "mediatek,efuse": for MT8192 - "mediatek,mt8195-efuse", "mediatek,efuse": for MT8195 - "mediatek,mt8516-efuse", "mediatek,efuse": for MT8516 -- reg: Should contain registers location and length -- bits: contain the bits range by offset and size - -= Data cells = -Are child nodes of MTK-EFUSE, bindings of which as described in -bindings/nvmem/nvmem.txt - -Example: - - efuse: efuse@10206000 { - compatible = "mediatek,mt8173-efuse"; - reg = <0 0x10206000 0 0x1000>; - #address-cells = <1>; - #size-cells = <1>; - - /* Data cells */ - thermal_calibration: calib@528 { - reg = <0x528 0xc>; - }; - }; - -= Data consumers = -Are device nodes which consume nvmem data cells. - -For example: - - thermal { - ... - nvmem-cells = <&thermal_calibration>; - nvmem-cell-names = "calibration"; - };
Convert MediaTek eFuse devicetree binding to YAML. Signed-off-by: Allen-KH Cheng <allen-kh.cheng@mediatek.com> --- .../devicetree/bindings/nvmem/mtk,efuse.yaml | 70 +++++++++++++++++++ .../devicetree/bindings/nvmem/mtk-efuse.txt | 43 ------------ 2 files changed, 70 insertions(+), 43 deletions(-) create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/nvmem/mtk,efuse.yaml delete mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/nvmem/mtk-efuse.txt