| Message ID | 20220131114726.973690-4-conor.dooley@microchip.com |
|---|---|
| State | Superseded |
| Headers | show |
| Series | Update the Icicle Kit device tree | expand |
On Mon, 31 Jan 2022 11:47:18 +0000, conor.dooley@microchip.com wrote: > From: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com> > > Add device tree bindings for the i2c controller on > the Microchip PolarFire SoC. > > Reviewed-by: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org> > > Signed-off-by: Daire McNamara <daire.mcnamara@microchip.com> > Signed-off-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com> > --- > .../bindings/i2c/microchip,mpfs-i2c.yaml | 57 +++++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 57 insertions(+) > create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/microchip,mpfs-i2c.yaml > My bot found errors running 'make DT_CHECKER_FLAGS=-m dt_binding_check' on your patch (DT_CHECKER_FLAGS is new in v5.13): yamllint warnings/errors: ./Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/microchip,mpfs-i2c.yaml:19:9: [warning] wrong indentation: expected 10 but found 8 (indentation) dtschema/dtc warnings/errors: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/microchip,mpfs-i2c.example.dts:19:18: fatal error: dt-bindings/clock/microchip,mpfs-clock.h: No such file or directory 19 | #include <dt-bindings/clock/microchip,mpfs-clock.h> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ compilation terminated. make[1]: *** [scripts/Makefile.lib:378: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/microchip,mpfs-i2c.example.dt.yaml] Error 1 make[1]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs.... make: *** [Makefile:1398: dt_binding_check] Error 2 doc reference errors (make refcheckdocs): See https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/1586674 This check can fail if there are any dependencies. The base for a patch series is generally the most recent rc1. If you already ran 'make dt_binding_check' and didn't see the above error(s), then make sure 'yamllint' is installed and dt-schema is up to date: pip3 install dtschema --upgrade Please check and re-submit.
On Mon, Jan 31, 2022 at 5:45 AM <conor.dooley@microchip.com> wrote: > > From: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com> > > Add device tree bindings for the i2c controller on > the Microchip PolarFire SoC. > > Reviewed-by: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org> > There should not be a blank line here. Also, tags should be in chronological order typically. If Daire sent this patch out with my tag, then the order is correct. If I gave it on a version you sent, then it goes between Daire's and your S-o-b which is the case here. Rob > Signed-off-by: Daire McNamara <daire.mcnamara@microchip.com> > Signed-off-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>
On 31/01/2022 15:39, Rob Herring wrote: > EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe > > On Mon, Jan 31, 2022 at 5:45 AM <conor.dooley@microchip.com> wrote: >> >> From: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com> >> >> Add device tree bindings for the i2c controller on >> the Microchip PolarFire SoC. >> >> Reviewed-by: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org> >> > > There should not be a blank line here. > > Also, tags should be in chronological order typically. If Daire sent > this patch out with my tag, then the order is correct. If I gave it on > a version you sent, then it goes between Daire's and your S-o-b which > is the case here. Oh, thanks. Probably been messing this up right/left/centre. On another note, I know I'm still missing a RB still on some of the bindings, but what is the acceptance path for this series? Any left over bindings not taken by subsystems via yourself and the dts changes via Palmer's tree? > > > Rob > >> Signed-off-by: Daire McNamara <daire.mcnamara@microchip.com> >> Signed-off-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>
On Mon, Jan 31, 2022 at 03:55:32PM +0000, Conor.Dooley@microchip.com wrote: > On 31/01/2022 15:39, Rob Herring wrote: > > EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe > > > > On Mon, Jan 31, 2022 at 5:45 AM <conor.dooley@microchip.com> wrote: > >> > >> From: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com> > >> > >> Add device tree bindings for the i2c controller on > >> the Microchip PolarFire SoC. > >> > >> Reviewed-by: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org> > >> > > > > There should not be a blank line here. > > > > Also, tags should be in chronological order typically. If Daire sent > > this patch out with my tag, then the order is correct. If I gave it on > > a version you sent, then it goes between Daire's and your S-o-b which > > is the case here. > Oh, thanks. Probably been messing this up right/left/centre. > > On another note, I know I'm still missing a RB still on some of the > bindings, but what is the acceptance path for this series? > Any left over bindings not taken by subsystems via yourself and the dts > changes via Palmer's tree? They should go via subsystems. I can take if you want, but not with missing dependencies. I need my tree working. Rob
On 04/02/2022 22:45, Rob Herring wrote: > On Mon, Jan 31, 2022 at 03:55:32PM +0000, Conor.Dooley@microchip.com wrote: >> On 31/01/2022 15:39, Rob Herring wrote: >>> EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe >>> >>> On Mon, Jan 31, 2022 at 5:45 AM <conor.dooley@microchip.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> From: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com> >>>> >>>> Add device tree bindings for the i2c controller on >>>> the Microchip PolarFire SoC. >>>> >>>> Reviewed-by: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org> >>>> >>> >>> There should not be a blank line here. >>> >>> Also, tags should be in chronological order typically. If Daire sent >>> this patch out with my tag, then the order is correct. If I gave it on >>> a version you sent, then it goes between Daire's and your S-o-b which >>> is the case here. >> Oh, thanks. Probably been messing this up right/left/centre. >> >> On another note, I know I'm still missing a RB still on some of the >> bindings, but what is the acceptance path for this series? >> Any left over bindings not taken by subsystems via yourself and the dts >> changes via Palmer's tree? > > They should go via subsystems. I can take if you want, but not with > missing dependencies. I need my tree working. I should just drop the dependency on the clock binding from the examples, not really much reason to have it there. Still a dep. for the device tree itself but would just make it easier for the bindings themselves. Conor.
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/microchip,mpfs-i2c.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/microchip,mpfs-i2c.yaml new file mode 100644 index 000000000000..065ec3d4c95e --- /dev/null +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/microchip,mpfs-i2c.yaml @@ -0,0 +1,57 @@ +# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause) +%YAML 1.2 +--- +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/i2c/microchip,mpfs-i2c.yaml# +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml# + +title: Microchip MPFS I2C Controller Device Tree Bindings + +maintainers: + - Daire McNamara <daire.mcnamara@microchip.com> + +allOf: + - $ref: /schemas/i2c/i2c-controller.yaml# + +properties: + compatible: + oneOf: + - items: + - const: microchip,mpfs-i2c # Microchip PolarFire SoC compatible SoCs + - const: microchip,corei2c-rtl-v7 # Microchip Fabric based i2c IP core + - const: microchip,corei2c-rtl-v7 # Microchip Fabric based i2c IP core + + reg: + maxItems: 1 + + interrupts: + maxItems: 1 + + clocks: + maxItems: 1 + + clock-frequency: + description: | + Desired I2C bus clock frequency in Hz. As only Standard and Fast + modes are supported, possible values are 100000 and 400000. + enum: [100000, 400000] + +required: + - compatible + - reg + - interrupts + - clocks + +unevaluatedProperties: false + +examples: + - | + #include <dt-bindings/clock/microchip,mpfs-clock.h> + i2c@2010a000 { + compatible = "microchip,mpfs-i2c", "microchip,corei2c-rtl-v7"; + reg = <0x2010a000 0x1000>; + clocks = <&clkcfg CLK_I2C0>; + interrupt-parent = <&plic>; + interrupts = <58>; + clock-frequency = <100000>; + }; +...