Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 20 Aug 2022 10:34:08 +0300 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2 4/7] dt-bindings: net: dsa: mediatek,mt7530: define port binding per compatible | From | Arınç ÜNAL <> |
| |
On 19.08.2022 15:43, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 13/08/2022 18:44, Arınç ÜNAL wrote: >> Define DSA port binding under each compatible device as each device >> requires different values for certain properties. >> >> Signed-off-by: Arınç ÜNAL <arinc.unal@arinc9.com> >> --- >> .../bindings/net/dsa/mediatek,mt7530.yaml | 116 +++++++++++++----- >> 1 file changed, 87 insertions(+), 29 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/dsa/mediatek,mt7530.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/dsa/mediatek,mt7530.yaml >> index cc87f48d4d07..ff51a2f6875f 100644 >> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/dsa/mediatek,mt7530.yaml >> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/dsa/mediatek,mt7530.yaml >> @@ -130,35 +130,6 @@ properties: >> ethsys. >> maxItems: 1 >> >> -patternProperties: >> - "^(ethernet-)?ports$": >> - type: object >> - >> - patternProperties: >> - "^(ethernet-)?port@[0-9]+$": >> - type: object >> - description: Ethernet switch ports >> - > > my comments from v1 apply here > > None of the reasons you said force you to define properties in some > allOf:if:then subblock. These force you to constrain the properties in > allOf:if:then, but not define. > > >> I can split patternProperties to two sections, but I can't directly >> define the reg property like you put above. > > Of course you can and original bindings were doing it. > > Let me ask specific questions (yes, no): > 1. Are ethernet-ports and ethernet-port present in each variant? > 2. Is dsa-port.yaml applicable to each variant? (looks like that - three > compatibles, three all:if:then) > 3. If reg appearing in each variant? > 4. If above is true, if reg is maximum one item in each variant?
All yes.
> > Looking at your patch, I think answer is 4x yes, which means you can > define them in one place and constrain in allOf:if:then, just like all > other schemas, because this one is not different.
If I understand correctly, I do this already with v3. Properties are defined under the constructed node. Accepted values for properties are constrained under if:then.
Arınç
| |