lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [Nov]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH v1 1/4] LF-2571-1: dt-bindings: soc: imx8m: add DT Binding doc for soc unique ID
On Wed, 4 Nov 2020 at 08:58, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 4 Nov 2020 at 04:09, Alice Guo <alice.guo@nxp.com> wrote:
> >
> > Add DT Binding doc for the Unique ID of i.MX 8M series.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Alice Guo <alice.guo@nxp.com>
> > ---
> > .../bindings/soc/imx/imx8m-unique-id.yaml | 32 +++++++++++++++++++
> > 1 file changed, 32 insertions(+)
> > create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/imx/imx8m-unique-id.yaml
> >
> > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/imx/imx8m-unique-id.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/imx/imx8m-unique-id.yaml
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 000000000000..f1e45458cec7
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/imx/imx8m-unique-id.yaml
> > @@ -0,0 +1,32 @@
> > +# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> > +%YAML 1.2
> > +---
> > +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/arm/nxp/imx8m-unique-id.yaml#
> > +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml#
> > +
> > +title: NXP i.MX8M Platforms Device Tree Bindings
>
> This is not a title for these bindings. Please describe the bindings
> for this device. Based on description, this might could go to
> bindings/nvmem directory.
>
> > +
> > +properties:
> > + compatible:
> > + oneOf:
>
> No need for oneOf.
>
> > + - items:
> > + - enum:
> > + - fsl,imx8mm-soc
> > + - fsl,imx8mn-soc
> > + - fsl,imx8mp-soc
> > + - fsl,imx8mq-soc
> > + - const: simple-bus
> > +
> > + nvmem-cells:
> > + maxItems: 1
> > + description:
> > + Reference to an nvmem node for the SOC Unique ID.
>
> Misleading description - nvmem-cells do not contain a reference. Just
> skip it, nvmem-cells should be obvious from the nvmem provider
> bindings.
>
> > +
> > + nvmem-cells-names:
> > + const: soc_unique_id
>
> additionalProperties: false

... or what looks more appropriate - you should include nvmem-consumer
bindings and use unevaluatedProperties:false.

Best regards,
Krzysztof

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-11-04 09:03    [W:0.972 / U:0.124 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site