Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 31 Aug 2022 11:51:13 +0200 | From | Michael Walle <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v1 09/14] dt-bindings: nvmem: add YAML schema for the sl28 vpd layout |
| |
Am 2022-08-31 11:24, schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski: > On 31/08/2022 11:17, Michael Walle wrote:
>> First thing, this binding isn't like the usual ones, so it might be >> totally wrong. >> >> What I'd like to achieve here is the following: >> >> We have the nvmem-consumer dt binding where you can reference a >> nvmem cell in a consumer node. Example: >> nvmem-cells = <&base_mac_address 5>; >> nvmem-cell-names = "mac-address"; >> >> On the other end of the link we have the nvmem-provider. The dt >> bindings works well if that one has individual cell nodes, like >> it is described in the nvmem.yaml binding. I.e. you can give the >> cell a label and make a reference to it in the consumer just like >> in the example above. > > You can also achieve it with phandle argument to the nvmwm controller, > right? Just like most of providers are doing (clocks, resets). Having > fake (empty) nodes just for that seems like overkill.
You mean like nvmem-cells = <&nvmem_device SERIAL_NUMBER>;
I'm not sure about the implications for now, because one is referencing the device and not individal cells. Putting that aside for now, there seems to be a problem with the index for the base mac address: You will have different number of arguments for the phandle. That doesn't work, right?
nvmem-cells = <&nvmem_device SERIAL_NUMBER>; nvmem-cells = <&nvmem_device BASE_MAC_ADDRESS 1>;
>> Now comes the catch: what if there is no actual description of the >> cell in the device tree, but is is generated during runtime. How >> can I get a label to it. > > Same as clocks, resets, power-domains and everyone else.
See https://git.kernel.org/torvalds/c/084973e944bec21804f8afb0515b25434438699a
And I guess this discussion is relevant here: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-devicetree/20220124160300.25131-1-zajec5@gmail.com/
>> Therefore, in this case, there is just >> an empty node and the driver will associate it with the cell >> created during runtime (see patch 10). It is not expected, that >> is has any properties. > > It cannot be even referenced as it does not have #cells property...
You mean "#nvmem-cell-cells"? See patch #2. None of the nvmem cells had such a property for now.
>>>> + >>>> + base-mac-address: >>> >>> Fields should be rather described here, not in top-level description. >>> >>>> + type: object >>> >>> On this level: >>> additionalProperties: false >>> >>>> + >>>> + properties: >>>> + "#nvmem-cell-cells": >>>> + const: 1 >>>> + >>> >>> I also wonder why you do not have unit addresses. What if you want to >>> have two base MAC addresses? >> >> That would describe an offset within the nvmem device. But the offset >> might not be constant, depending on the content. My understanding >> so far was that in that case, you use the "-N" suffix. >> >> base-mac-address-1 >> base-mac-address-2 >> >> (or maybe completely different names). > > You do not allow "base-mac-address-1". Your binding explicitly accepts > only "base-mac-address".
Because the binding matches the driver, which matches the driver which matches the VPD data and there is only one base mac address. Thus, no need for different ones.
-michael
| |