[1/5] dt-bindings: interrupt-controller: renesas,rzg2l-irqc: Document RZ/Five SoC

Commit Message

Lad, Prabhakar Jan. 29, 2024, 3:16 p.m. UTC

From: Lad Prabhakar <[e-mail]>

Document RZ/Five (R9A07G043F) IRQC bindings. The IRQC block on RZ/Five SoC
is almost identical to one found on the RZ/G2L SoC with below differences,
* Additional BUS error interrupt
* Additional ECCRAM error interrupt
* Has additional mask control registers for NMI/IRQ/TINT

Hence new compatible string "renesas,r9a07g043f-irqc" is added for RZ/Five
SoC.

Signed-off-by: Lad Prabhakar <[e-mail]>
---
 .../renesas,rzg2l-irqc.yaml                   | 27 +++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 27 insertions(+)

Comments

Conor Dooley Jan. 29, 2024, 5:30 p.m. UTC | #1

On Mon, Jan 29, 2024 at 03:16:14PM +0000, Prabhakar wrote:
> From: Lad Prabhakar <[e-mail]>
> 
> Document RZ/Five (R9A07G043F) IRQC bindings. The IRQC block on RZ/Five SoC
> is almost identical to one found on the RZ/G2L SoC with below differences,
> * Additional BUS error interrupt
> * Additional ECCRAM error interrupt
> * Has additional mask control registers for NMI/IRQ/TINT
> 
> Hence new compatible string "renesas,r9a07g043f-irqc" is added for RZ/Five
> SoC.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Lad Prabhakar <[e-mail]>
> ---
>  .../renesas,rzg2l-irqc.yaml                   | 27 +++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 27 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/interrupt-controller/renesas,rzg2l-irqc.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/interrupt-controller/renesas,rzg2l-irqc.yaml
> index d3b5aec0a3f7..3abc01e48934 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/interrupt-controller/renesas,rzg2l-irqc.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/interrupt-controller/renesas,rzg2l-irqc.yaml
> @@ -23,6 +23,7 @@ properties:
>    compatible:
>      items:
>        - enum:
> +          - renesas,r9a07g043f-irqc   # RZ/Five
>            - renesas,r9a07g043u-irqc   # RZ/G2UL
>            - renesas,r9a07g044-irqc    # RZ/G2{L,LC}
>            - renesas,r9a07g054-irqc    # RZ/V2L
> @@ -88,6 +89,12 @@ properties:
>        - description: GPIO interrupt, TINT30
>        - description: GPIO interrupt, TINT31
>        - description: Bus error interrupt
> +      - description: ECCRAM0 TIE1 interrupt
> +      - description: ECCRAM0 TIE2 interrupt
> +      - description: ECCRAM0 overflow interrupt
> +      - description: ECCRAM1 TIE1 interrupt
> +      - description: ECCRAM1 TIE2 interrupt
> +      - description: ECCRAM1 overflow interrupt
>  
>    interrupt-names:
>      minItems: 41
> @@ -134,6 +141,12 @@ properties:
>        - const: tint30
>        - const: tint31
>        - const: bus-err
> +      - const: eccram0-tie1
> +      - const: eccram0-tie2
> +      - const: eccram0-ovf
> +      - const: eccram1-tie1
> +      - const: eccram1-tie2
> +      - const: eccram1-ovf

I think the restrictions already in the file become incorrect with this
patch:
  - if:
      properties:
        compatible:
          contains:
            enum:
              - renesas,r9a07g043u-irqc
              - renesas,r9a08g045-irqc
    then:
      properties:
        interrupts:
          minItems: 42
        interrupt-names:
          minItems: 42
      required:
        - interrupt-names

This used to require all 42 interrupts for the two compatibles here
and at least the first 41 otherwise. Now you've increased the number of
interrupts to 48 thereby removing the upper limits on the existing
devices.

Given the commit message, I figure that providing 48 interrupts for
(at least some of) those devices would be incorrect?

Cheers,
Conor.

>  
>    clocks:
>      maxItems: 2
> @@ -180,6 +193,20 @@ allOf:
>        required:
>          - interrupt-names
>  
> +  - if:
> +      properties:
> +        compatible:
> +          contains:
> +            const: renesas,r9a07g043f-irqc
> +    then:
> +      properties:
> +        interrupts:
> +          minItems: 48
> +        interrupt-names:
> +          minItems: 48
> +      required:
> +        - interrupt-names
> +
>  unevaluatedProperties: false
>  
>  examples:
> -- 
> 2.34.1
>

Geert Uytterhoeven Jan. 30, 2024, 11:13 a.m. UTC | #2

Hi Prabhakar,

On Mon, Jan 29, 2024 at 6:30 PM Conor Dooley <[e-mail]> wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 29, 2024 at 03:16:14PM +0000, Prabhakar wrote:
> > From: Lad Prabhakar <[e-mail]>
> >
> > Document RZ/Five (R9A07G043F) IRQC bindings. The IRQC block on RZ/Five SoC
> > is almost identical to one found on the RZ/G2L SoC with below differences,
> > * Additional BUS error interrupt
> > * Additional ECCRAM error interrupt
> > * Has additional mask control registers for NMI/IRQ/TINT
> >
> > Hence new compatible string "renesas,r9a07g043f-irqc" is added for RZ/Five
> > SoC.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Lad Prabhakar <[e-mail]>

Thanks for your patch!

> > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/interrupt-controller/renesas,rzg2l-irqc.yaml
> > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/interrupt-controller/renesas,rzg2l-irqc.yaml
> > @@ -23,6 +23,7 @@ properties:
> >    compatible:
> >      items:
> >        - enum:
> > +          - renesas,r9a07g043f-irqc   # RZ/Five
> >            - renesas,r9a07g043u-irqc   # RZ/G2UL
> >            - renesas,r9a07g044-irqc    # RZ/G2{L,LC}
> >            - renesas,r9a07g054-irqc    # RZ/V2L
> > @@ -88,6 +89,12 @@ properties:
> >        - description: GPIO interrupt, TINT30
> >        - description: GPIO interrupt, TINT31
> >        - description: Bus error interrupt
> > +      - description: ECCRAM0 TIE1 interrupt

ECCRAM0 1bit error interrupt?

> > +      - description: ECCRAM0 TIE2 interrupt

ECCRAM0 2bit error interrupt?

> > +      - description: ECCRAM0 overflow interrupt

ECCRAM0 error overflow interrupt?

> > +      - description: ECCRAM1 TIE1 interrupt
> > +      - description: ECCRAM1 TIE2 interrupt
> > +      - description: ECCRAM1 overflow interrupt

Likewise.

> >    interrupt-names:
> >      minItems: 41
> > @@ -134,6 +141,12 @@ properties:
> >        - const: tint30
> >        - const: tint31
> >        - const: bus-err
> > +      - const: eccram0-tie1
> > +      - const: eccram0-tie2
> > +      - const: eccram0-ovf
> > +      - const: eccram1-tie1
> > +      - const: eccram1-tie2
> > +      - const: eccram1-ovf

Why not use the naming from the docs (all 6 include "ti")?
EC7TIE1_0, EC7TIE2_0, EC7TIOVF_0, EC7TIE1_1, EC7TIE2_1, EC7TIOVF_1
=> ec7tie1-0, ec7tie2-0, ec7tiovf-0, ...?

> I think the restrictions already in the file become incorrect with this
> patch:
>   - if:
>       properties:
>         compatible:
>           contains:
>             enum:
>               - renesas,r9a07g043u-irqc
>               - renesas,r9a08g045-irqc
>     then:
>       properties:
>         interrupts:
>           minItems: 42
>         interrupt-names:
>           minItems: 42
>       required:
>         - interrupt-names
>
> This used to require all 42 interrupts for the two compatibles here
> and at least the first 41 otherwise. Now you've increased the number of
> interrupts to 48 thereby removing the upper limits on the existing
> devices.

I'm gonna repeat (and extend) my question from [1]: How come we thought
RZ/G2L and RZ/V2L do not have the bus error and ECCRAM interrupts?
Looks like most of the conditional handling can be removed (see below).

> Given the commit message, I figure that providing 48 interrupts for
> (at least some of) those devices would be incorrect?

Looks like all of RZ/G2L{,C}, RZ/V2L, RZ/G2UL, and RZ/Five support
all 48 interrupts.  RZ/G3S lacks the final three for ECCRAM1.

[1] "Re: [PATCH v3 8/9] dt-bindings: interrupt-controller:
renesas,rzg2l-irqc: Document RZ/G3S"
https://lore.kernel.org/r/[e-mail]

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

                        Geert

Lad, Prabhakar Jan. 30, 2024, 12:59 p.m. UTC | #3

Hi Geert,

Thank you for the review.

On Tue, Jan 30, 2024 at 11:13 AM Geert Uytterhoeven
<[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> Hi Prabhakar,
>
> On Mon, Jan 29, 2024 at 6:30 PM Conor Dooley <[e-mail]> wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 29, 2024 at 03:16:14PM +0000, Prabhakar wrote:
> > > From: Lad Prabhakar <[e-mail]>
> > >
> > > Document RZ/Five (R9A07G043F) IRQC bindings. The IRQC block on RZ/Five SoC
> > > is almost identical to one found on the RZ/G2L SoC with below differences,
> > > * Additional BUS error interrupt
> > > * Additional ECCRAM error interrupt
> > > * Has additional mask control registers for NMI/IRQ/TINT
> > >
> > > Hence new compatible string "renesas,r9a07g043f-irqc" is added for RZ/Five
> > > SoC.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Lad Prabhakar <[e-mail]>
>
> Thanks for your patch!
>
> > > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/interrupt-controller/renesas,rzg2l-irqc.yaml
> > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/interrupt-controller/renesas,rzg2l-irqc.yaml
> > > @@ -23,6 +23,7 @@ properties:
> > >    compatible:
> > >      items:
> > >        - enum:
> > > +          - renesas,r9a07g043f-irqc   # RZ/Five
> > >            - renesas,r9a07g043u-irqc   # RZ/G2UL
> > >            - renesas,r9a07g044-irqc    # RZ/G2{L,LC}
> > >            - renesas,r9a07g054-irqc    # RZ/V2L
> > > @@ -88,6 +89,12 @@ properties:
> > >        - description: GPIO interrupt, TINT30
> > >        - description: GPIO interrupt, TINT31
> > >        - description: Bus error interrupt
> > > +      - description: ECCRAM0 TIE1 interrupt
>
> ECCRAM0 1bit error interrupt?
>
OK.

> > > +      - description: ECCRAM0 TIE2 interrupt
>
> ECCRAM0 2bit error interrupt?
>
OK.
> > > +      - description: ECCRAM0 overflow interrupt
>
> ECCRAM0 error overflow interrupt?
>
> > > +      - description: ECCRAM1 TIE1 interrupt
> > > +      - description: ECCRAM1 TIE2 interrupt
> > > +      - description: ECCRAM1 overflow interrupt
>
> Likewise.
>
OK.

> > >    interrupt-names:
> > >      minItems: 41
> > > @@ -134,6 +141,12 @@ properties:
> > >        - const: tint30
> > >        - const: tint31
> > >        - const: bus-err
> > > +      - const: eccram0-tie1
> > > +      - const: eccram0-tie2
> > > +      - const: eccram0-ovf
> > > +      - const: eccram1-tie1
> > > +      - const: eccram1-tie2
> > > +      - const: eccram1-ovf
>
> Why not use the naming from the docs (all 6 include "ti")?
> EC7TIE1_0, EC7TIE2_0, EC7TIOVF_0, EC7TIE1_1, EC7TIE2_1, EC7TIOVF_1
> => ec7tie1-0, ec7tie2-0, ec7tiovf-0, ...?
>
Agreed.

> > I think the restrictions already in the file become incorrect with this
> > patch:
> >   - if:
> >       properties:
> >         compatible:
> >           contains:
> >             enum:
> >               - renesas,r9a07g043u-irqc
> >               - renesas,r9a08g045-irqc
> >     then:
> >       properties:
> >         interrupts:
> >           minItems: 42
> >         interrupt-names:
> >           minItems: 42
> >       required:
> >         - interrupt-names
> >
> > This used to require all 42 interrupts for the two compatibles here
> > and at least the first 41 otherwise. Now you've increased the number of
> > interrupts to 48 thereby removing the upper limits on the existing
> > devices.
>
> I'm gonna repeat (and extend) my question from [1]: How come we thought
> RZ/G2L and RZ/V2L do not have the bus error and ECCRAM interrupts?
>
Hmm not sure how this was missed earlier.

> Looks like most of the conditional handling can be removed (see below).
>
> > Given the commit message, I figure that providing 48 interrupts for
> > (at least some of) those devices would be incorrect?
>
> Looks like all of RZ/G2L{,C}, RZ/V2L, RZ/G2UL, and RZ/Five support
> all 48 interrupts.  RZ/G3S lacks the final three for ECCRAM1.
>
Agreed for RZ/G2L{,C}, RZ/V2L, RZ/G2UL, and RZ/Five, but for RZ/G3S it
becomes tricky the interrupts for ECCRAM0/1 are combined hence they
have just 3 interrupts. How do you propose the above interrupt naming?

> [1] "Re: [PATCH v3 8/9] dt-bindings: interrupt-controller:
> renesas,rzg2l-irqc: Document RZ/G3S"
> https://lore.kernel.org/r/[e-mail]
>
Sorry I missed this thread.

Cheers,
Prabhakar

Geert Uytterhoeven Jan. 30, 2024, 1:05 p.m. UTC | #4

Hi Prabhakar,

On Tue, Jan 30, 2024 at 1:59 PM Lad, Prabhakar
<[e-mail]> wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 30, 2024 at 11:13 AM Geert Uytterhoeven
> <[e-mail]> wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 29, 2024 at 6:30 PM Conor Dooley <[e-mail]> wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jan 29, 2024 at 03:16:14PM +0000, Prabhakar wrote:
> > > > From: Lad Prabhakar <[e-mail]>
> > > >
> > > > Document RZ/Five (R9A07G043F) IRQC bindings. The IRQC block on RZ/Five SoC
> > > > is almost identical to one found on the RZ/G2L SoC with below differences,
> > > > * Additional BUS error interrupt
> > > > * Additional ECCRAM error interrupt
> > > > * Has additional mask control registers for NMI/IRQ/TINT
> > > >
> > > > Hence new compatible string "renesas,r9a07g043f-irqc" is added for RZ/Five
> > > > SoC.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Lad Prabhakar <[e-mail]>
> >
> > > > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/interrupt-controller/renesas,rzg2l-irqc.yaml
> > > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/interrupt-controller/renesas,rzg2l-irqc.yaml
> > > > @@ -134,6 +141,12 @@ properties:
> > > >        - const: tint30
> > > >        - const: tint31
> > > >        - const: bus-err
> > > > +      - const: eccram0-tie1
> > > > +      - const: eccram0-tie2
> > > > +      - const: eccram0-ovf
> > > > +      - const: eccram1-tie1
> > > > +      - const: eccram1-tie2
> > > > +      - const: eccram1-ovf
> >
> > Why not use the naming from the docs (all 6 include "ti")?
> > EC7TIE1_0, EC7TIE2_0, EC7TIOVF_0, EC7TIE1_1, EC7TIE2_1, EC7TIOVF_1
> > => ec7tie1-0, ec7tie2-0, ec7tiovf-0, ...?
> >
> Agreed.
>
> > > I think the restrictions already in the file become incorrect with this
> > > patch:
> > >   - if:
> > >       properties:
> > >         compatible:
> > >           contains:
> > >             enum:
> > >               - renesas,r9a07g043u-irqc
> > >               - renesas,r9a08g045-irqc
> > >     then:
> > >       properties:
> > >         interrupts:
> > >           minItems: 42
> > >         interrupt-names:
> > >           minItems: 42
> > >       required:
> > >         - interrupt-names
> > >
> > > This used to require all 42 interrupts for the two compatibles here
> > > and at least the first 41 otherwise. Now you've increased the number of
> > > interrupts to 48 thereby removing the upper limits on the existing
> > > devices.
> >
> > I'm gonna repeat (and extend) my question from [1]: How come we thought
> > RZ/G2L and RZ/V2L do not have the bus error and ECCRAM interrupts?
> >
> Hmm not sure how this was missed earlier.
>
> > Looks like most of the conditional handling can be removed (see below).
> >
> > > Given the commit message, I figure that providing 48 interrupts for
> > > (at least some of) those devices would be incorrect?
> >
> > Looks like all of RZ/G2L{,C}, RZ/V2L, RZ/G2UL, and RZ/Five support
> > all 48 interrupts.  RZ/G3S lacks the final three for ECCRAM1.
> >
> Agreed for RZ/G2L{,C}, RZ/V2L, RZ/G2UL, and RZ/Five, but for RZ/G3S it
> becomes tricky the interrupts for ECCRAM0/1 are combined hence they
> have just 3 interrupts. How do you propose the above interrupt naming?

I guess it doesn't hurt to have an index 0 on a part that has only a
single set?

Alternatives would be to
  1. Drop the index completely on RZ/G3S, complicating bindings and
     driver,
  1. Drop the index for the first set, and use index 2 for the second set,
     causing the names to differ even more on parts with 2 sets.

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

                        Geert

Lad, Prabhakar Jan. 30, 2024, 4 p.m. UTC | #5

Hi Geert,

On Tue, Jan 30, 2024 at 1:06 PM Geert Uytterhoeven <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> Hi Prabhakar,
>
> On Tue, Jan 30, 2024 at 1:59 PM Lad, Prabhakar
> <[e-mail]> wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 30, 2024 at 11:13 AM Geert Uytterhoeven
> > <[e-mail]> wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jan 29, 2024 at 6:30 PM Conor Dooley <[e-mail]> wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Jan 29, 2024 at 03:16:14PM +0000, Prabhakar wrote:
> > > > > From: Lad Prabhakar <[e-mail]>
> > > > >
> > > > > Document RZ/Five (R9A07G043F) IRQC bindings. The IRQC block on RZ/Five SoC
> > > > > is almost identical to one found on the RZ/G2L SoC with below differences,
> > > > > * Additional BUS error interrupt
> > > > > * Additional ECCRAM error interrupt
> > > > > * Has additional mask control registers for NMI/IRQ/TINT
> > > > >
> > > > > Hence new compatible string "renesas,r9a07g043f-irqc" is added for RZ/Five
> > > > > SoC.
> > > > >
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Lad Prabhakar <[e-mail]>
> > >
> > > > > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/interrupt-controller/renesas,rzg2l-irqc.yaml
> > > > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/interrupt-controller/renesas,rzg2l-irqc.yaml
> > > > > @@ -134,6 +141,12 @@ properties:
> > > > >        - const: tint30
> > > > >        - const: tint31
> > > > >        - const: bus-err
> > > > > +      - const: eccram0-tie1
> > > > > +      - const: eccram0-tie2
> > > > > +      - const: eccram0-ovf
> > > > > +      - const: eccram1-tie1
> > > > > +      - const: eccram1-tie2
> > > > > +      - const: eccram1-ovf
> > >
> > > Why not use the naming from the docs (all 6 include "ti")?
> > > EC7TIE1_0, EC7TIE2_0, EC7TIOVF_0, EC7TIE1_1, EC7TIE2_1, EC7TIOVF_1
> > > => ec7tie1-0, ec7tie2-0, ec7tiovf-0, ...?
> > >
> > Agreed.
> >
> > > > I think the restrictions already in the file become incorrect with this
> > > > patch:
> > > >   - if:
> > > >       properties:
> > > >         compatible:
> > > >           contains:
> > > >             enum:
> > > >               - renesas,r9a07g043u-irqc
> > > >               - renesas,r9a08g045-irqc
> > > >     then:
> > > >       properties:
> > > >         interrupts:
> > > >           minItems: 42
> > > >         interrupt-names:
> > > >           minItems: 42
> > > >       required:
> > > >         - interrupt-names
> > > >
> > > > This used to require all 42 interrupts for the two compatibles here
> > > > and at least the first 41 otherwise. Now you've increased the number of
> > > > interrupts to 48 thereby removing the upper limits on the existing
> > > > devices.
> > >
> > > I'm gonna repeat (and extend) my question from [1]: How come we thought
> > > RZ/G2L and RZ/V2L do not have the bus error and ECCRAM interrupts?
> > >
> > Hmm not sure how this was missed earlier.
> >
> > > Looks like most of the conditional handling can be removed (see below).
> > >
> > > > Given the commit message, I figure that providing 48 interrupts for
> > > > (at least some of) those devices would be incorrect?
> > >
> > > Looks like all of RZ/G2L{,C}, RZ/V2L, RZ/G2UL, and RZ/Five support
> > > all 48 interrupts.  RZ/G3S lacks the final three for ECCRAM1.
> > >
> > Agreed for RZ/G2L{,C}, RZ/V2L, RZ/G2UL, and RZ/Five, but for RZ/G3S it
> > becomes tricky the interrupts for ECCRAM0/1 are combined hence they
> > have just 3 interrupts. How do you propose the above interrupt naming?
>
> I guess it doesn't hurt to have an index 0 on a part that has only a
> single set?
>
Let's go with this option...

> Alternatives would be to
>   1. Drop the index completely on RZ/G3S, complicating bindings and
>      driver,
>   1. Drop the index for the first set, and use index 2 for the second set,
>      causing the names to differ even more on parts with 2 sets.
>
...instead of complicating.

Cheers,
Prabhakar

Lad, Prabhakar Feb. 2, 2024, 9:22 a.m. UTC | #6

Hi Conor,

Thank you for the review.

On Mon, Jan 29, 2024 at 5:30 PM Conor Dooley <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jan 29, 2024 at 03:16:14PM +0000, Prabhakar wrote:
> > From: Lad Prabhakar <[e-mail]>
> >
> > Document RZ/Five (R9A07G043F) IRQC bindings. The IRQC block on RZ/Five SoC
> > is almost identical to one found on the RZ/G2L SoC with below differences,
> > * Additional BUS error interrupt
> > * Additional ECCRAM error interrupt
> > * Has additional mask control registers for NMI/IRQ/TINT
> >
> > Hence new compatible string "renesas,r9a07g043f-irqc" is added for RZ/Five
> > SoC.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Lad Prabhakar <[e-mail]>
> > ---
> >  .../renesas,rzg2l-irqc.yaml                   | 27 +++++++++++++++++++
> >  1 file changed, 27 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/interrupt-controller/renesas,rzg2l-irqc.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/interrupt-controller/renesas,rzg2l-irqc.yaml
> > index d3b5aec0a3f7..3abc01e48934 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/interrupt-controller/renesas,rzg2l-irqc.yaml
> > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/interrupt-controller/renesas,rzg2l-irqc.yaml
> > @@ -23,6 +23,7 @@ properties:
> >    compatible:
> >      items:
> >        - enum:
> > +          - renesas,r9a07g043f-irqc   # RZ/Five
> >            - renesas,r9a07g043u-irqc   # RZ/G2UL
> >            - renesas,r9a07g044-irqc    # RZ/G2{L,LC}
> >            - renesas,r9a07g054-irqc    # RZ/V2L
> > @@ -88,6 +89,12 @@ properties:
> >        - description: GPIO interrupt, TINT30
> >        - description: GPIO interrupt, TINT31
> >        - description: Bus error interrupt
> > +      - description: ECCRAM0 TIE1 interrupt
> > +      - description: ECCRAM0 TIE2 interrupt
> > +      - description: ECCRAM0 overflow interrupt
> > +      - description: ECCRAM1 TIE1 interrupt
> > +      - description: ECCRAM1 TIE2 interrupt
> > +      - description: ECCRAM1 overflow interrupt
> >
> >    interrupt-names:
> >      minItems: 41
> > @@ -134,6 +141,12 @@ properties:
> >        - const: tint30
> >        - const: tint31
> >        - const: bus-err
> > +      - const: eccram0-tie1
> > +      - const: eccram0-tie2
> > +      - const: eccram0-ovf
> > +      - const: eccram1-tie1
> > +      - const: eccram1-tie2
> > +      - const: eccram1-ovf
>
> I think the restrictions already in the file become incorrect with this
> patch:
>   - if:
>       properties:
>         compatible:
>           contains:
>             enum:
>               - renesas,r9a07g043u-irqc
>               - renesas,r9a08g045-irqc
>     then:
>       properties:
>         interrupts:
>           minItems: 42
>         interrupt-names:
>           minItems: 42
>       required:
>         - interrupt-names
>
> This used to require all 42 interrupts for the two compatibles here
> and at least the first 41 otherwise. Now you've increased the number of
> interrupts to 48 thereby removing the upper limits on the existing
> devices.
>
> Given the commit message, I figure that providing 48 interrupts for
> (at least some of) those devices would be incorrect?
>
Agreed, I will fix this in the next version.

Cheers,
Prabhakar

Patch

diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/interrupt-controller/renesas,rzg2l-irqc.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/interrupt-controller/renesas,rzg2l-irqc.yaml
index d3b5aec0a3f7..3abc01e48934 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/interrupt-controller/renesas,rzg2l-irqc.yaml
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/interrupt-controller/renesas,rzg2l-irqc.yaml
@@ -23,6 +23,7 @@  properties:
   compatible:
     items:
       - enum:
+          - renesas,r9a07g043f-irqc   # RZ/Five
           - renesas,r9a07g043u-irqc   # RZ/G2UL
           - renesas,r9a07g044-irqc    # RZ/G2{L,LC}
           - renesas,r9a07g054-irqc    # RZ/V2L
@@ -88,6 +89,12 @@  properties:
       - description: GPIO interrupt, TINT30
       - description: GPIO interrupt, TINT31
       - description: Bus error interrupt
+      - description: ECCRAM0 TIE1 interrupt
+      - description: ECCRAM0 TIE2 interrupt
+      - description: ECCRAM0 overflow interrupt
+      - description: ECCRAM1 TIE1 interrupt
+      - description: ECCRAM1 TIE2 interrupt
+      - description: ECCRAM1 overflow interrupt
 
   interrupt-names:
     minItems: 41
@@ -134,6 +141,12 @@  properties:
       - const: tint30
       - const: tint31
       - const: bus-err
+      - const: eccram0-tie1
+      - const: eccram0-tie2
+      - const: eccram0-ovf
+      - const: eccram1-tie1
+      - const: eccram1-tie2
+      - const: eccram1-ovf
 
   clocks:
     maxItems: 2
@@ -180,6 +193,20 @@  allOf:
       required:
         - interrupt-names
 
+  - if:
+      properties:
+        compatible:
+          contains:
+            const: renesas,r9a07g043f-irqc
+    then:
+      properties:
+        interrupts:
+          minItems: 48
+        interrupt-names:
+          minItems: 48
+      required:
+        - interrupt-names
+
 unevaluatedProperties: false
 
 examples: