| Message ID | 20230814093931.9298-1-eugen.hristev@collabora.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [v2,1/2] dt-bindings: phy: mediatek,tphy: allow simple nodename pattern | expand |
On Mon, Aug 14, 2023 at 12:39:30PM +0300, Eugen Hristev wrote: > The pattern for the nodename only allows t-phy@... , however, for the case > when the t-phy has no `reg` and only `ranges` (basically when the t-phy > is just a parent node), dtc will throw this warning: > > Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): /t-phy@1a243000: node has a unit name, but no reg or ranges property > > For a node like this: > > sata_phy: t-phy@1a243000 { > ranges; > > sata_port: sata-phy@1a243000 { > reg = <0 0x1a243000 0 0x0100>; > }; > }; > > it is normal that the parent node 't-phy' would be without any address, as in: > > sata_phy: t-phy { > ranges; > > sata_port: sata-phy@1a243000 { > reg = <0 0x1a243000 0 0x0100>; > }; > }; > > because being just a holder it does not have its own reg. > > However the binding does not allow such a name for the t-phy, so with this > patch, making the `@[0-9a-f]+` part optional, such node is possible. > > Signed-off-by: Eugen Hristev <eugen.hristev@collabora.com> This seems reasonable to me, perhaps the lads will scream. Acked-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com> Thanks, Conor. > --- > Changes in v2: > - none > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/mediatek,tphy.yaml | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/mediatek,tphy.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/mediatek,tphy.yaml > index 230a17f24966..2bb91542e984 100644 > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/mediatek,tphy.yaml > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/mediatek,tphy.yaml > @@ -64,7 +64,7 @@ description: | > > properties: > $nodename: > - pattern: "^t-phy@[0-9a-f]+$" > + pattern: "^t-phy(@[0-9a-f]+)?$" > > compatible: > oneOf: > -- > 2.34.1 >
On Mon, 14 Aug 2023 12:39:30 +0300, Eugen Hristev wrote: > The pattern for the nodename only allows t-phy@... , however, for the case > when the t-phy has no `reg` and only `ranges` (basically when the t-phy > is just a parent node), dtc will throw this warning: > > Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): /t-phy@1a243000: node has a unit name, but no reg or ranges property > > For a node like this: > > [...] Applied, thanks! [1/2] dt-bindings: phy: mediatek,tphy: allow simple nodename pattern commit: e4077ca4ebdefa1b4616e4dafcb67b621253b233 Best regards,
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/mediatek,tphy.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/mediatek,tphy.yaml index 230a17f24966..2bb91542e984 100644 --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/mediatek,tphy.yaml +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/mediatek,tphy.yaml @@ -64,7 +64,7 @@ description: | properties: $nodename: - pattern: "^t-phy@[0-9a-f]+$" + pattern: "^t-phy(@[0-9a-f]+)?$" compatible: oneOf:
The pattern for the nodename only allows t-phy@... , however, for the case when the t-phy has no `reg` and only `ranges` (basically when the t-phy is just a parent node), dtc will throw this warning: Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): /t-phy@1a243000: node has a unit name, but no reg or ranges property For a node like this: sata_phy: t-phy@1a243000 { ranges; sata_port: sata-phy@1a243000 { reg = <0 0x1a243000 0 0x0100>; }; }; it is normal that the parent node 't-phy' would be without any address, as in: sata_phy: t-phy { ranges; sata_port: sata-phy@1a243000 { reg = <0 0x1a243000 0 0x0100>; }; }; because being just a holder it does not have its own reg. However the binding does not allow such a name for the t-phy, so with this patch, making the `@[0-9a-f]+` part optional, such node is possible. Signed-off-by: Eugen Hristev <eugen.hristev@collabora.com> --- Changes in v2: - none Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/mediatek,tphy.yaml | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)