| Message ID | 20250409144250.206590-3-ivecera@redhat.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
| Series | Add Microchip ZL3073x support (part 1) | expand |
On Wed, Apr 09, 2025 at 04:42:38PM GMT, Ivan Vecera wrote: > Add DT bindings for Microchip Azurite DPLL chip family. These chips > provides 2 independent DPLL channels, up to 10 differential or > single-ended inputs and up to 20 differential or 20 single-ended outputs. > It can be connected via I2C or SPI busses. > > Signed-off-by: Ivan Vecera <ivecera@redhat.com> > --- > .../bindings/dpll/microchip,zl3073x-i2c.yaml | 74 ++++++++++++++++++ > .../bindings/dpll/microchip,zl3073x-spi.yaml | 77 +++++++++++++++++++ No, you do not get two files. No such bindings were accepted since some years. > 2 files changed, 151 insertions(+) > create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dpll/microchip,zl3073x-i2c.yaml > create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dpll/microchip,zl3073x-spi.yaml > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dpll/microchip,zl3073x-i2c.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dpll/microchip,zl3073x-i2c.yaml > new file mode 100644 > index 0000000000000..d9280988f9eb7 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dpll/microchip,zl3073x-i2c.yaml > @@ -0,0 +1,74 @@ > +# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0 OR BSD-2-Clause) > +%YAML 1.2 > +--- > +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/dpll/microchip,zl3073x-i2c.yaml# > +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml# > + > +title: I2C-attached Microchip Azurite DPLL device > + > +maintainers: > + - Ivan Vecera <ivecera@redhat.com> > + > +description: > + Microchip Azurite DPLL (ZL3073x) is a family of DPLL devices that > + provides 2 independent DPLL channels, up to 10 differential or > + single-ended inputs and up to 20 differential or 20 single-ended outputs. > + It can be connected via multiple busses, one of them being I2C. > + > +properties: > + compatible: > + enum: > + - microchip,zl3073x-i2c I already said: you have one compatible, not two. One. Also, still wildcard, so still a no. > + > + reg: > + maxItems: 1 > + > +required: > + - compatible > + - reg > + > +allOf: > + - $ref: /schemas/dpll/dpll-device.yaml# > + > +unevaluatedProperties: false > + > +examples: > + - | > + i2c { > + #address-cells = <1>; > + #size-cells = <0>; > + > + dpll@70 { > + compatible = "microchip,zl3073x-i2c"; > + reg = <0x70>; > + #address-cells = <0>; > + #size-cells = <0>; Again, not used. Drop. > + dpll-types = "pps", "eec"; > + > + input-pins { > + #address-cells = <1>; > + #size-cells = <0>; > + > + pin@0 { /* REF0P */ > + reg = <0>; > + label = "Input 0"; > + supported-frequencies = /bits/ 64 <1 1000>; > + type = "ext"; > + }; > + }; > + > + output-pins { > + #address-cells = <1>; > + #size-cells = <0>; > + > + pin@3 { /* OUT1N */ > + reg = <3>; > + esync-control; > + label = "Output 1"; > + supported-frequencies = /bits/ 64 <1 10000>; > + type = "gnss"; > + }; > + }; > + }; > + }; > +... > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dpll/microchip,zl3073x-spi.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dpll/microchip,zl3073x-spi.yaml > new file mode 100644 > index 0000000000000..7bd6e5099e1ce > --- /dev/null > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dpll/microchip,zl3073x-spi.yaml No, you do not get two files. Neither two compatibles, nor two files. Please look at existing bindings how they do it for such devices. Best regards, Krzysztof
On 10. 04. 25 9:06 dop., Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On Wed, Apr 09, 2025 at 04:42:38PM GMT, Ivan Vecera wrote: >> Add DT bindings for Microchip Azurite DPLL chip family. These chips >> provides 2 independent DPLL channels, up to 10 differential or >> single-ended inputs and up to 20 differential or 20 single-ended outputs. >> It can be connected via I2C or SPI busses. >> >> Signed-off-by: Ivan Vecera <ivecera@redhat.com> >> --- >> .../bindings/dpll/microchip,zl3073x-i2c.yaml | 74 ++++++++++++++++++ >> .../bindings/dpll/microchip,zl3073x-spi.yaml | 77 +++++++++++++++++++ > > No, you do not get two files. No such bindings were accepted since some > years. > >> 2 files changed, 151 insertions(+) >> create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dpll/microchip,zl3073x-i2c.yaml >> create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dpll/microchip,zl3073x-spi.yaml >> >> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dpll/microchip,zl3073x-i2c.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dpll/microchip,zl3073x-i2c.yaml >> new file mode 100644 >> index 0000000000000..d9280988f9eb7 >> --- /dev/null >> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dpll/microchip,zl3073x-i2c.yaml >> @@ -0,0 +1,74 @@ >> +# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0 OR BSD-2-Clause) >> +%YAML 1.2 >> +--- >> +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/dpll/microchip,zl3073x-i2c.yaml# >> +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml# >> + >> +title: I2C-attached Microchip Azurite DPLL device >> + >> +maintainers: >> + - Ivan Vecera <ivecera@redhat.com> >> + >> +description: >> + Microchip Azurite DPLL (ZL3073x) is a family of DPLL devices that >> + provides 2 independent DPLL channels, up to 10 differential or >> + single-ended inputs and up to 20 differential or 20 single-ended outputs. >> + It can be connected via multiple busses, one of them being I2C. >> + >> +properties: >> + compatible: >> + enum: >> + - microchip,zl3073x-i2c > > I already said: you have one compatible, not two. One. Ah, you mean something like: iio/accel/adi,adxl313.yaml Do you? > Also, still wildcard, so still a no. This is not wildcard, Microchip uses this to designate DPLL devices with the same characteristics. But I can use microchip,azurite, is it more appropriate? >> + >> + reg: >> + maxItems: 1 >> + >> +required: >> + - compatible >> + - reg >> + >> +allOf: >> + - $ref: /schemas/dpll/dpll-device.yaml# >> + >> +unevaluatedProperties: false >> + >> +examples: >> + - | >> + i2c { >> + #address-cells = <1>; >> + #size-cells = <0>; >> + >> + dpll@70 { >> + compatible = "microchip,zl3073x-i2c"; >> + reg = <0x70>; >> + #address-cells = <0>; >> + #size-cells = <0>; > > Again, not used. Drop. Sorry, will do. >> + dpll-types = "pps", "eec"; >> + >> + input-pins { >> + #address-cells = <1>; >> + #size-cells = <0>; >> + >> + pin@0 { /* REF0P */ >> + reg = <0>; >> + label = "Input 0"; >> + supported-frequencies = /bits/ 64 <1 1000>; >> + type = "ext"; >> + }; >> + }; >> + >> + output-pins { >> + #address-cells = <1>; >> + #size-cells = <0>; >> + >> + pin@3 { /* OUT1N */ >> + reg = <3>; >> + esync-control; >> + label = "Output 1"; >> + supported-frequencies = /bits/ 64 <1 10000>; >> + type = "gnss"; >> + }; >> + }; >> + }; >> + }; >> +... >> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dpll/microchip,zl3073x-spi.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dpll/microchip,zl3073x-spi.yaml >> new file mode 100644 >> index 0000000000000..7bd6e5099e1ce >> --- /dev/null >> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dpll/microchip,zl3073x-spi.yaml > > No, you do not get two files. Neither two compatibles, nor two files. > Please look at existing bindings how they do it for such devices. Thanks Krzysztof for comments. Ivan
On Thu, Apr 10, 2025 at 09:45:47AM +0200, Ivan Vecera wrote: > > > On 10. 04. 25 9:06 dop., Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 09, 2025 at 04:42:38PM GMT, Ivan Vecera wrote: > > > Add DT bindings for Microchip Azurite DPLL chip family. These chips > > > provides 2 independent DPLL channels, up to 10 differential or > > > single-ended inputs and up to 20 differential or 20 single-ended outputs. > > > It can be connected via I2C or SPI busses. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Ivan Vecera <ivecera@redhat.com> > > > --- > > > .../bindings/dpll/microchip,zl3073x-i2c.yaml | 74 ++++++++++++++++++ > > > .../bindings/dpll/microchip,zl3073x-spi.yaml | 77 +++++++++++++++++++ > > > > No, you do not get two files. No such bindings were accepted since some > > years. > > > > > 2 files changed, 151 insertions(+) > > > create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dpll/microchip,zl3073x-i2c.yaml > > > create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dpll/microchip,zl3073x-spi.yaml > > > > > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dpll/microchip,zl3073x-i2c.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dpll/microchip,zl3073x-i2c.yaml > > > new file mode 100644 > > > index 0000000000000..d9280988f9eb7 > > > --- /dev/null > > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dpll/microchip,zl3073x-i2c.yaml > > > @@ -0,0 +1,74 @@ > > > +# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0 OR BSD-2-Clause) > > > +%YAML 1.2 > > > +--- > > > +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/dpll/microchip,zl3073x-i2c.yaml# > > > +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml# > > > + > > > +title: I2C-attached Microchip Azurite DPLL device > > > + > > > +maintainers: > > > + - Ivan Vecera <ivecera@redhat.com> > > > + > > > +description: > > > + Microchip Azurite DPLL (ZL3073x) is a family of DPLL devices that > > > + provides 2 independent DPLL channels, up to 10 differential or > > > + single-ended inputs and up to 20 differential or 20 single-ended outputs. > > > + It can be connected via multiple busses, one of them being I2C. > > > + > > > +properties: > > > + compatible: > > > + enum: > > > + - microchip,zl3073x-i2c > > > > I already said: you have one compatible, not two. One. > > Ah, you mean something like: > iio/accel/adi,adxl313.yaml > > Do you? > > > Also, still wildcard, so still a no. > > This is not wildcard, Microchip uses this to designate DPLL devices with the > same characteristics. That's the very definition of a wildcard, no? The x is matching against several different devices. There's like 14 different parts matching zl3073x, with varying numbers of outputs and channels. One compatible for all of that hardly seems suitable. > > But I can use microchip,azurite, is it more appropriate? No, I think that is worse actually.
On 10. 04. 25 3:18 odp., Conor Dooley wrote: > On Thu, Apr 10, 2025 at 09:45:47AM +0200, Ivan Vecera wrote: >> >> >> On 10. 04. 25 9:06 dop., Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>> On Wed, Apr 09, 2025 at 04:42:38PM GMT, Ivan Vecera wrote: >>>> Add DT bindings for Microchip Azurite DPLL chip family. These chips >>>> provides 2 independent DPLL channels, up to 10 differential or >>>> single-ended inputs and up to 20 differential or 20 single-ended outputs. >>>> It can be connected via I2C or SPI busses. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Ivan Vecera <ivecera@redhat.com> >>>> --- >>>> .../bindings/dpll/microchip,zl3073x-i2c.yaml | 74 ++++++++++++++++++ >>>> .../bindings/dpll/microchip,zl3073x-spi.yaml | 77 +++++++++++++++++++ >>> >>> No, you do not get two files. No such bindings were accepted since some >>> years. >>> >>>> 2 files changed, 151 insertions(+) >>>> create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dpll/microchip,zl3073x-i2c.yaml >>>> create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dpll/microchip,zl3073x-spi.yaml >>>> >>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dpll/microchip,zl3073x-i2c.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dpll/microchip,zl3073x-i2c.yaml >>>> new file mode 100644 >>>> index 0000000000000..d9280988f9eb7 >>>> --- /dev/null >>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dpll/microchip,zl3073x-i2c.yaml >>>> @@ -0,0 +1,74 @@ >>>> +# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0 OR BSD-2-Clause) >>>> +%YAML 1.2 >>>> +--- >>>> +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/dpll/microchip,zl3073x-i2c.yaml# >>>> +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml# >>>> + >>>> +title: I2C-attached Microchip Azurite DPLL device >>>> + >>>> +maintainers: >>>> + - Ivan Vecera <ivecera@redhat.com> >>>> + >>>> +description: >>>> + Microchip Azurite DPLL (ZL3073x) is a family of DPLL devices that >>>> + provides 2 independent DPLL channels, up to 10 differential or >>>> + single-ended inputs and up to 20 differential or 20 single-ended outputs. >>>> + It can be connected via multiple busses, one of them being I2C. >>>> + >>>> +properties: >>>> + compatible: >>>> + enum: >>>> + - microchip,zl3073x-i2c >>> >>> I already said: you have one compatible, not two. One. >> >> Ah, you mean something like: >> iio/accel/adi,adxl313.yaml >> >> Do you? >> >>> Also, still wildcard, so still a no. >> >> This is not wildcard, Microchip uses this to designate DPLL devices with the >> same characteristics. > > That's the very definition of a wildcard, no? The x is matching against > several different devices. There's like 14 different parts matching > zl3073x, with varying numbers of outputs and channels. One compatible > for all of that hardly seems suitable. Prathosh, could you please bring more light on this? Thanks. > >> >> But I can use microchip,azurite, is it more appropriate? > > No, I think that is worse actually.
-----Original Message----- From: Ivan Vecera <ivecera@redhat.com> Sent: Thursday 10 April 2025 14:36 To: Conor Dooley <conor@kernel.org>; Prathosh Satish - M66066 <Prathosh.Satish@microchip.com> Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>; netdev@vger.kernel.org; Vadim Fedorenko <vadim.fedorenko@linux.dev>; Arkadiusz Kubalewski <arkadiusz.kubalewski@intel.com>; Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us>; Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>; Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@kernel.org>; Conor Dooley <conor+dt@kernel.org>; Prathosh Satish - M66066 <Prathosh.Satish@microchip.com>; Lee Jones <lee@kernel.org>; Kees Cook <kees@kernel.org>; Andy Shevchenko <andy@kernel.org>; Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>; Michal Schmidt <mschmidt@redhat.com>; devicetree@vger.kernel.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 02/14] dt-bindings: dpll: Add support for Microchip Azurite chip family EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe On 10. 04. 25 3:18 odp., Conor Dooley wrote: > On Thu, Apr 10, 2025 at 09:45:47AM +0200, Ivan Vecera wrote: >> >> >> On 10. 04. 25 9:06 dop., Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>> On Wed, Apr 09, 2025 at 04:42:38PM GMT, Ivan Vecera wrote: >>>> Add DT bindings for Microchip Azurite DPLL chip family. These chips >>>> provides 2 independent DPLL channels, up to 10 differential or >>>> single-ended inputs and up to 20 differential or 20 single-ended outputs. >>>> It can be connected via I2C or SPI busses. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Ivan Vecera <ivecera@redhat.com> >>>> --- >>>> .../bindings/dpll/microchip,zl3073x-i2c.yaml | 74 ++++++++++++++++++ >>>> .../bindings/dpll/microchip,zl3073x-spi.yaml | 77 >>>> +++++++++++++++++++ >>> >>> No, you do not get two files. No such bindings were accepted since >>> some years. >>> >>>> 2 files changed, 151 insertions(+) >>>> create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dpll/microchip,zl3073x-i2c.yaml >>>> create mode 100644 >>>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dpll/microchip,zl3073x-spi.yaml >>>> >>>> diff --git >>>> a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dpll/microchip,zl3073x-i2c.yaml >>>> b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dpll/microchip,zl3073x-i2c.yaml >>>> new file mode 100644 >>>> index 0000000000000..d9280988f9eb7 >>>> --- /dev/null >>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dpll/microchip,zl3073x-i2c. >>>> +++ yaml >>>> @@ -0,0 +1,74 @@ >>>> +# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0 OR BSD-2-Clause) %YAML 1.2 >>>> +--- >>>> +$id: >>>> +http://devicetree.org/schemas/dpll/microchip,zl3073x-i2c.yaml# >>>> +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml# >>>> + >>>> +title: I2C-attached Microchip Azurite DPLL device >>>> + >>>> +maintainers: >>>> + - Ivan Vecera <ivecera@redhat.com> >>>> + >>>> +description: >>>> + Microchip Azurite DPLL (ZL3073x) is a family of DPLL devices >>>> +that >>>> + provides 2 independent DPLL channels, up to 10 differential or >>>> + single-ended inputs and up to 20 differential or 20 single-ended outputs. >>>> + It can be connected via multiple busses, one of them being I2C. >>>> + >>>> +properties: >>>> + compatible: >>>> + enum: >>>> + - microchip,zl3073x-i2c >>> >>> I already said: you have one compatible, not two. One. >> >> Ah, you mean something like: >> iio/accel/adi,adxl313.yaml >> >> Do you? >> >>> Also, still wildcard, so still a no. >> >> This is not wildcard, Microchip uses this to designate DPLL devices >> with the same characteristics. > > That's the very definition of a wildcard, no? The x is matching > against several different devices. There's like 14 different parts > matching zl3073x, with varying numbers of outputs and channels. One > compatible for all of that hardly seems suitable. Prathosh, could you please bring more light on this? > Just to clarify, the original driver was written specifically with 2-channel > chips in mind (ZL30732) with 10 input and 20 outputs, which led to some confusion of using zl3073x as compatible. > However, the final version of the driver will support the entire ZL3073x family > ZL30731 to ZL30735 and some subset of ZL30732 like ZL80732 etc > ensuring compatibility across all variants. Thanks. > >> >> But I can use microchip,azurite, is it more appropriate? > > No, I think that is worse actually.
On 10. 04. 25 7:07 odp., Prathosh.Satish@microchip.com wrote: > -----Original Message----- > From: Ivan Vecera <ivecera@redhat.com> > Sent: Thursday 10 April 2025 14:36 > To: Conor Dooley <conor@kernel.org>; Prathosh Satish - M66066 <Prathosh.Satish@microchip.com> > Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>; netdev@vger.kernel.org; Vadim Fedorenko <vadim.fedorenko@linux.dev>; Arkadiusz Kubalewski <arkadiusz.kubalewski@intel.com>; Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us>; Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>; Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@kernel.org>; Conor Dooley <conor+dt@kernel.org>; Prathosh Satish - M66066 <Prathosh.Satish@microchip.com>; Lee Jones <lee@kernel.org>; Kees Cook <kees@kernel.org>; Andy Shevchenko <andy@kernel.org>; Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>; Michal Schmidt <mschmidt@redhat.com>; devicetree@vger.kernel.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org > Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 02/14] dt-bindings: dpll: Add support for Microchip Azurite chip family > > EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe > > On 10. 04. 25 3:18 odp., Conor Dooley wrote: >> On Thu, Apr 10, 2025 at 09:45:47AM +0200, Ivan Vecera wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 10. 04. 25 9:06 dop., Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>>> On Wed, Apr 09, 2025 at 04:42:38PM GMT, Ivan Vecera wrote: >>>>> Add DT bindings for Microchip Azurite DPLL chip family. These chips >>>>> provides 2 independent DPLL channels, up to 10 differential or >>>>> single-ended inputs and up to 20 differential or 20 single-ended outputs. >>>>> It can be connected via I2C or SPI busses. >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Ivan Vecera <ivecera@redhat.com> >>>>> --- >>>>> .../bindings/dpll/microchip,zl3073x-i2c.yaml | 74 ++++++++++++++++++ >>>>> .../bindings/dpll/microchip,zl3073x-spi.yaml | 77 >>>>> +++++++++++++++++++ >>>> >>>> No, you do not get two files. No such bindings were accepted since >>>> some years. >>>> >>>>> 2 files changed, 151 insertions(+) >>>>> create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dpll/microchip,zl3073x-i2c.yaml >>>>> create mode 100644 >>>>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dpll/microchip,zl3073x-spi.yaml >>>>> >>>>> diff --git >>>>> a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dpll/microchip,zl3073x-i2c.yaml >>>>> b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dpll/microchip,zl3073x-i2c.yaml >>>>> new file mode 100644 >>>>> index 0000000000000..d9280988f9eb7 >>>>> --- /dev/null >>>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dpll/microchip,zl3073x-i2c. >>>>> +++ yaml >>>>> @@ -0,0 +1,74 @@ >>>>> +# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0 OR BSD-2-Clause) %YAML 1.2 >>>>> +--- >>>>> +$id: >>>>> +http://devicetree.org/schemas/dpll/microchip,zl3073x-i2c.yaml# >>>>> +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml# >>>>> + >>>>> +title: I2C-attached Microchip Azurite DPLL device >>>>> + >>>>> +maintainers: >>>>> + - Ivan Vecera <ivecera@redhat.com> >>>>> + >>>>> +description: >>>>> + Microchip Azurite DPLL (ZL3073x) is a family of DPLL devices >>>>> +that >>>>> + provides 2 independent DPLL channels, up to 10 differential or >>>>> + single-ended inputs and up to 20 differential or 20 single-ended outputs. >>>>> + It can be connected via multiple busses, one of them being I2C. >>>>> + >>>>> +properties: >>>>> + compatible: >>>>> + enum: >>>>> + - microchip,zl3073x-i2c >>>> >>>> I already said: you have one compatible, not two. One. >>> >>> Ah, you mean something like: >>> iio/accel/adi,adxl313.yaml >>> >>> Do you? >>> >>>> Also, still wildcard, so still a no. >>> >>> This is not wildcard, Microchip uses this to designate DPLL devices >>> with the same characteristics. >> >> That's the very definition of a wildcard, no? The x is matching >> against several different devices. There's like 14 different parts >> matching zl3073x, with varying numbers of outputs and channels. One >> compatible for all of that hardly seems suitable. > > Prathosh, could you please bring more light on this? > > Just to clarify, the original driver was written specifically with 2-channel > chips in mind (ZL30732) with 10 input and 20 outputs, which led to some confusion of using zl3073x as compatible. > However, the final version of the driver will support the entire ZL3073x family > ZL30731 to ZL30735 and some subset of ZL30732 like ZL80732 etc > ensuring compatibility across all variants. Huh, then ok... We should specify zl30731-5 compatibles and they differs only by number of channels (1-5) ? The number of input and output pins are the same (10 and 20), right? If so, I have to update the whole driver to accommodate dynamic number of channels according chip type. Btw. Conor, Krzystof if we use microchip,zl30731, ..., microchip,zl30735... What should be the filename for the yaml file? Thanks, Ivan > Thanks. >> >>> >>> But I can use microchip,azurite, is it more appropriate? >> >> No, I think that is worse actually. >
> Prathosh, could you please bring more light on this? > > > Just to clarify, the original driver was written specifically with 2-channel > > chips in mind (ZL30732) with 10 input and 20 outputs, which led to some confusion of using zl3073x as compatible. > > However, the final version of the driver will support the entire ZL3073x family > > ZL30731 to ZL30735 and some subset of ZL30732 like ZL80732 etc > > ensuring compatibility across all variants. Hi Prathosh Your email quoting is very odd, i nearly missed this reply. Does the device itself have an ID register? If you know you have something in the range ZL30731 to ZL30735, you can ask the hardware what it is, and the driver then does not need any additional information from DT, it can hard code it all based on the ID in the register? Andrew
On 10. 04. 25 7:36 odp., Andrew Lunn wrote: >> Prathosh, could you please bring more light on this? >> >>> Just to clarify, the original driver was written specifically with 2-channel >>> chips in mind (ZL30732) with 10 input and 20 outputs, which led to some confusion of using zl3073x as compatible. >>> However, the final version of the driver will support the entire ZL3073x family >>> ZL30731 to ZL30735 and some subset of ZL30732 like ZL80732 etc >>> ensuring compatibility across all variants. > > Hi Prathosh > > Your email quoting is very odd, i nearly missed this reply. > > Does the device itself have an ID register? If you know you have > something in the range ZL30731 to ZL30735, you can ask the hardware > what it is, and the driver then does not need any additional > information from DT, it can hard code it all based on the ID in the > register? > > Andrew > Hi Andrew, yes there is ID register that identifies the ID. But what compatible should be used? microchip,zl3073x was rejected as wildcard and we should use all compatibles. Thanks, Ivan
Hi Ivan, yes you are right, the only difference is the number of channels. Prathosh -----Original Message----- From: Ivan Vecera <ivecera@redhat.com> Sent: Thursday 10 April 2025 18:36 To: Prathosh Satish - M66066 <Prathosh.Satish@microchip.com>; conor@kernel.org Cc: krzk@kernel.org; netdev@vger.kernel.org; vadim.fedorenko@linux.dev; arkadiusz.kubalewski@intel.com; jiri@resnulli.us; robh@kernel.org; krzk+dt@kernel.org; conor+dt@kernel.org; lee@kernel.org; kees@kernel.org; andy@kernel.org; akpm@linux-foundation.org; mschmidt@redhat.com; devicetree@vger.kernel.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 02/14] dt-bindings: dpll: Add support for Microchip Azurite chip family EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe On 10. 04. 25 7:07 odp., Prathosh.Satish@microchip.com wrote: > -----Original Message----- > From: Ivan Vecera <ivecera@redhat.com> > Sent: Thursday 10 April 2025 14:36 > To: Conor Dooley <conor@kernel.org>; Prathosh Satish - M66066 > <Prathosh.Satish@microchip.com> > Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>; netdev@vger.kernel.org; > Vadim Fedorenko <vadim.fedorenko@linux.dev>; Arkadiusz Kubalewski > <arkadiusz.kubalewski@intel.com>; Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us>; Rob > Herring <robh@kernel.org>; Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@kernel.org>; > Conor Dooley <conor+dt@kernel.org>; Prathosh Satish - M66066 > <Prathosh.Satish@microchip.com>; Lee Jones <lee@kernel.org>; Kees Cook > <kees@kernel.org>; Andy Shevchenko <andy@kernel.org>; Andrew Morton > <akpm@linux-foundation.org>; Michal Schmidt <mschmidt@redhat.com>; > devicetree@vger.kernel.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; > linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org > Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 02/14] dt-bindings: dpll: Add support for > Microchip Azurite chip family > > EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know > the content is safe > > On 10. 04. 25 3:18 odp., Conor Dooley wrote: >> On Thu, Apr 10, 2025 at 09:45:47AM +0200, Ivan Vecera wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 10. 04. 25 9:06 dop., Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>>> On Wed, Apr 09, 2025 at 04:42:38PM GMT, Ivan Vecera wrote: >>>>> Add DT bindings for Microchip Azurite DPLL chip family. These >>>>> chips provides 2 independent DPLL channels, up to 10 differential >>>>> or single-ended inputs and up to 20 differential or 20 single-ended outputs. >>>>> It can be connected via I2C or SPI busses. >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Ivan Vecera <ivecera@redhat.com> >>>>> --- >>>>> .../bindings/dpll/microchip,zl3073x-i2c.yaml | 74 ++++++++++++++++++ >>>>> .../bindings/dpll/microchip,zl3073x-spi.yaml | 77 >>>>> +++++++++++++++++++ >>>> >>>> No, you do not get two files. No such bindings were accepted since >>>> some years. >>>> >>>>> 2 files changed, 151 insertions(+) >>>>> create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dpll/microchip,zl3073x-i2c.yaml >>>>> create mode 100644 >>>>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dpll/microchip,zl3073x-spi.yaml >>>>> >>>>> diff --git >>>>> a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dpll/microchip,zl3073x-i2c.yam >>>>> l >>>>> b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dpll/microchip,zl3073x-i2c.yam >>>>> l >>>>> new file mode 100644 >>>>> index 0000000000000..d9280988f9eb7 >>>>> --- /dev/null >>>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dpll/microchip,zl3073x-i2c. >>>>> +++ yaml >>>>> @@ -0,0 +1,74 @@ >>>>> +# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0 OR BSD-2-Clause) %YAML 1.2 >>>>> +--- >>>>> +$id: >>>>> +http://devicetree.org/schemas/dpll/microchip,zl3073x-i2c.yaml# >>>>> +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml# >>>>> + >>>>> +title: I2C-attached Microchip Azurite DPLL device >>>>> + >>>>> +maintainers: >>>>> + - Ivan Vecera <ivecera@redhat.com> >>>>> + >>>>> +description: >>>>> + Microchip Azurite DPLL (ZL3073x) is a family of DPLL devices >>>>> +that >>>>> + provides 2 independent DPLL channels, up to 10 differential or >>>>> + single-ended inputs and up to 20 differential or 20 single-ended outputs. >>>>> + It can be connected via multiple busses, one of them being I2C. >>>>> + >>>>> +properties: >>>>> + compatible: >>>>> + enum: >>>>> + - microchip,zl3073x-i2c >>>> >>>> I already said: you have one compatible, not two. One. >>> >>> Ah, you mean something like: >>> iio/accel/adi,adxl313.yaml >>> >>> Do you? >>> >>>> Also, still wildcard, so still a no. >>> >>> This is not wildcard, Microchip uses this to designate DPLL devices >>> with the same characteristics. >> >> That's the very definition of a wildcard, no? The x is matching >> against several different devices. There's like 14 different parts >> matching zl3073x, with varying numbers of outputs and channels. One >> compatible for all of that hardly seems suitable. > > Prathosh, could you please bring more light on this? > > Just to clarify, the original driver was written specifically with > 2-channel chips in mind (ZL30732) with 10 input and 20 outputs, which led to some confusion of using zl3073x as compatible. > However, the final version of the driver will support the entire > ZL3073x family > ZL30731 to ZL30735 and some subset of ZL30732 like ZL80732 etc > ensuring compatibility across all variants. Huh, then ok... We should specify zl30731-5 compatibles and they differs only by number of channels (1-5) ? The number of input and output pins are the same (10 and 20), right? If so, I have to update the whole driver to accommodate dynamic number of channels according chip type. Btw. Conor, Krzystof if we use microchip,zl30731, ..., microchip,zl30735... What should be the filename for the yaml file? Thanks, Ivan > Thanks. >> >>> >>> But I can use microchip,azurite, is it more appropriate? >> >> No, I think that is worse actually. >
On Thu, Apr 10, 2025 at 08:33:31PM +0200, Ivan Vecera wrote: > > > On 10. 04. 25 7:36 odp., Andrew Lunn wrote: > > > Prathosh, could you please bring more light on this? > > > > > > > Just to clarify, the original driver was written specifically with 2-channel > > > > chips in mind (ZL30732) with 10 input and 20 outputs, which led to some confusion of using zl3073x as compatible. > > > > However, the final version of the driver will support the entire ZL3073x family > > > > ZL30731 to ZL30735 and some subset of ZL30732 like ZL80732 etc > > > > ensuring compatibility across all variants. > > > > Hi Prathosh > > > > Your email quoting is very odd, i nearly missed this reply. > > > > Does the device itself have an ID register? If you know you have > > something in the range ZL30731 to ZL30735, you can ask the hardware > > what it is, and the driver then does not need any additional > > information from DT, it can hard code it all based on the ID in the > > register? > > > > Andrew > > > Hi Andrew, > yes there is ID register that identifies the ID. But what compatible should > be used? > > microchip,zl3073x was rejected as wildcard and we should use all > compatibles. You have two choices really: 1) You list each device with its own compatible, because they are in fact not compatible. You need to handle each one different, they have different DT properties, etc. If you do that, please validate the ID register against the compatible and return -ENODEV if they don't match. 2) You say the devices are compatible. So the DT compatible just indicates the family, enough information for the driver to go find the ID register. This does however require the binding is the same for all devices. You cannot have one family member listing 10 inputs in its binding, and another family member listing 20. If you say your devices are incompatible, and list lots of compatibles, you can then use constraints in the yaml, based on the compatible, to limit each family member to what it supports. My guess is, you are going to take the first route. Andrew
On 10. 04. 25 11:12 odp., Andrew Lunn wrote: > On Thu, Apr 10, 2025 at 08:33:31PM +0200, Ivan Vecera wrote: >> >> >> On 10. 04. 25 7:36 odp., Andrew Lunn wrote: >>>> Prathosh, could you please bring more light on this? >>>> >>>>> Just to clarify, the original driver was written specifically with 2-channel >>>>> chips in mind (ZL30732) with 10 input and 20 outputs, which led to some confusion of using zl3073x as compatible. >>>>> However, the final version of the driver will support the entire ZL3073x family >>>>> ZL30731 to ZL30735 and some subset of ZL30732 like ZL80732 etc >>>>> ensuring compatibility across all variants. >>> >>> Hi Prathosh >>> >>> Your email quoting is very odd, i nearly missed this reply. >>> >>> Does the device itself have an ID register? If you know you have >>> something in the range ZL30731 to ZL30735, you can ask the hardware >>> what it is, and the driver then does not need any additional >>> information from DT, it can hard code it all based on the ID in the >>> register? >>> >>> Andrew >>> >> Hi Andrew, >> yes there is ID register that identifies the ID. But what compatible should >> be used? >> >> microchip,zl3073x was rejected as wildcard and we should use all >> compatibles. > > You have two choices really: > > 1) You list each device with its own compatible, because they are in > fact not compatible. You need to handle each one different, they have > different DT properties, etc. If you do that, please validate the ID > register against the compatible and return -ENODEV if they don't > match. > > 2) You say the devices are compatible. So the DT compatible just > indicates the family, enough information for the driver to go find the > ID register. This does however require the binding is the same for all > devices. You cannot have one family member listing 10 inputs in its > binding, and another family member listing 20. > > If you say your devices are incompatible, and list lots of > compatibles, you can then use constraints in the yaml, based on the > compatible, to limit each family member to what it supports. > > My guess is, you are going to take the first route. Yes, this looks reasonable... in this case should I use microchip,zl3073x.yaml like e.g. gpio/gpio-pca95xx.yaml? Ivan
On Fri, Apr 11, 2025 at 11:56:15AM +0200, Ivan Vecera wrote: > > > On 10. 04. 25 11:12 odp., Andrew Lunn wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 10, 2025 at 08:33:31PM +0200, Ivan Vecera wrote: > > > > > > > > > On 10. 04. 25 7:36 odp., Andrew Lunn wrote: > > > > > Prathosh, could you please bring more light on this? > > > > > > > > > > > Just to clarify, the original driver was written specifically with 2-channel > > > > > > chips in mind (ZL30732) with 10 input and 20 outputs, which led to some confusion of using zl3073x as compatible. > > > > > > However, the final version of the driver will support the entire ZL3073x family > > > > > > ZL30731 to ZL30735 and some subset of ZL30732 like ZL80732 etc > > > > > > ensuring compatibility across all variants. > > > > > > > > Hi Prathosh > > > > > > > > Your email quoting is very odd, i nearly missed this reply. > > > > > > > > Does the device itself have an ID register? If you know you have > > > > something in the range ZL30731 to ZL30735, you can ask the hardware > > > > what it is, and the driver then does not need any additional > > > > information from DT, it can hard code it all based on the ID in the > > > > register? > > > > > > > > Andrew > > > > > > > Hi Andrew, > > > yes there is ID register that identifies the ID. But what compatible should > > > be used? > > > > > > microchip,zl3073x was rejected as wildcard and we should use all > > > compatibles. > > > > You have two choices really: > > > > 1) You list each device with its own compatible, because they are in > > fact not compatible. You need to handle each one different, they have > > different DT properties, etc. If you do that, please validate the ID > > register against the compatible and return -ENODEV if they don't > > match. > > > > 2) You say the devices are compatible. So the DT compatible just > > indicates the family, enough information for the driver to go find the > > ID register. This does however require the binding is the same for all > > devices. You cannot have one family member listing 10 inputs in its > > binding, and another family member listing 20. > > > > If you say your devices are incompatible, and list lots of > > compatibles, you can then use constraints in the yaml, based on the > > compatible, to limit each family member to what it supports. > > > > My guess is, you are going to take the first route. > > Yes, this looks reasonable... in this case should I use > microchip,zl3073x.yaml like e.g. gpio/gpio-pca95xx.yaml? No, please pick one of the compatibles in the file and name the same as one of those.
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dpll/microchip,zl3073x-i2c.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dpll/microchip,zl3073x-i2c.yaml new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000..d9280988f9eb7 --- /dev/null +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dpll/microchip,zl3073x-i2c.yaml @@ -0,0 +1,74 @@ +# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0 OR BSD-2-Clause) +%YAML 1.2 +--- +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/dpll/microchip,zl3073x-i2c.yaml# +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml# + +title: I2C-attached Microchip Azurite DPLL device + +maintainers: + - Ivan Vecera <ivecera@redhat.com> + +description: + Microchip Azurite DPLL (ZL3073x) is a family of DPLL devices that + provides 2 independent DPLL channels, up to 10 differential or + single-ended inputs and up to 20 differential or 20 single-ended outputs. + It can be connected via multiple busses, one of them being I2C. + +properties: + compatible: + enum: + - microchip,zl3073x-i2c + + reg: + maxItems: 1 + +required: + - compatible + - reg + +allOf: + - $ref: /schemas/dpll/dpll-device.yaml# + +unevaluatedProperties: false + +examples: + - | + i2c { + #address-cells = <1>; + #size-cells = <0>; + + dpll@70 { + compatible = "microchip,zl3073x-i2c"; + reg = <0x70>; + #address-cells = <0>; + #size-cells = <0>; + dpll-types = "pps", "eec"; + + input-pins { + #address-cells = <1>; + #size-cells = <0>; + + pin@0 { /* REF0P */ + reg = <0>; + label = "Input 0"; + supported-frequencies = /bits/ 64 <1 1000>; + type = "ext"; + }; + }; + + output-pins { + #address-cells = <1>; + #size-cells = <0>; + + pin@3 { /* OUT1N */ + reg = <3>; + esync-control; + label = "Output 1"; + supported-frequencies = /bits/ 64 <1 10000>; + type = "gnss"; + }; + }; + }; + }; +... diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dpll/microchip,zl3073x-spi.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dpll/microchip,zl3073x-spi.yaml new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000..7bd6e5099e1ce --- /dev/null +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dpll/microchip,zl3073x-spi.yaml @@ -0,0 +1,77 @@ +# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0 OR BSD-2-Clause) +%YAML 1.2 +--- +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/dpll/microchip,zl3073x-spi.yaml# +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml# + +title: SPI-attached Microchip Azurite DPLL device + +maintainers: + - Ivan Vecera <ivecera@redhat.com> + +description: + Microchip Azurite DPLL (ZL3073x) is a family of DPLL devices that + provides 2 independent DPLL channels, up to 10 differential or + single-ended inputs and up to 20 differential or 20 single-ended outputs. + It can be connected via multiple busses, one of them being I2C. + +properties: + compatible: + enum: + - microchip,zl3073x-spi + + reg: + maxItems: 1 + +required: + - compatible + - reg + +allOf: + - $ref: /schemas/dpll/dpll-device.yaml# + - $ref: /schemas/spi/spi-peripheral-props.yaml# + +unevaluatedProperties: false + +examples: + - | + spi { + #address-cells = <1>; + #size-cells = <0>; + + dpll@70 { + compatible = "microchip,zl3073x-spi"; + reg = <0x70>; + #address-cells = <0>; + #size-cells = <0>; + spi-max-frequency = <12500000>; + + dpll-types = "pps", "eec"; + + input-pins { + #address-cells = <1>; + #size-cells = <0>; + + pin@0 { /* REF0P */ + reg = <0>; + label = "Input 0"; + supported-frequencies = /bits/ 64 <1 1000>; + type = "ext"; + }; + }; + + output-pins { + #address-cells = <1>; + #size-cells = <0>; + + pin@3 { /* OUT1N */ + reg = <3>; + esync-control; + label = "Output 1"; + supported-frequencies = /bits/ 64 <1 10000>; + type = "gnss"; + }; + }; + }; + }; +...
Add DT bindings for Microchip Azurite DPLL chip family. These chips provides 2 independent DPLL channels, up to 10 differential or single-ended inputs and up to 20 differential or 20 single-ended outputs. It can be connected via I2C or SPI busses. Signed-off-by: Ivan Vecera <ivecera@redhat.com> --- .../bindings/dpll/microchip,zl3073x-i2c.yaml | 74 ++++++++++++++++++ .../bindings/dpll/microchip,zl3073x-spi.yaml | 77 +++++++++++++++++++ 2 files changed, 151 insertions(+) create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dpll/microchip,zl3073x-i2c.yaml create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dpll/microchip,zl3073x-spi.yaml