Re: [PATCH v3 21/26] dt-bindings: crypto: convert rockchip-crypto to yaml

LABBE Corentin
2022-03-24T16:20:46Z

Le Tue, Mar 22, 2022 at 07:04:43PM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski a écrit :
> On 21/03/2022 21:07, Corentin Labbe wrote:
> > Convert rockchip-crypto to yaml
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Corentin Labbe <clabbe@baylibre.com>
> > ---
> > .../crypto/rockchip,rk3288-crypto.yaml | 84 +++++++++++++++++++
> > .../bindings/crypto/rockchip-crypto.txt | 28 -------
> > 2 files changed, 84 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-)
> > create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/crypto/rockchip,rk3288-crypto.yaml
> > delete mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/crypto/rockchip-crypto.txt
> >
> > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/crypto/rockchip,rk3288-crypto.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/crypto/rockchip,rk3288-crypto.yaml
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 000000000000..a6be89a1c890
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/crypto/rockchip,rk3288-crypto.yaml
> > @@ -0,0 +1,84 @@
> > +# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause)
> > +%YAML 1.2
> > +---
> > +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/crypto/rockchip,rk3288-crypto.yaml#
> > +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml#
> > +
> > +title: Rockchip Electronics And Security Accelerator
> > +
> > +maintainers:
> > + - Heiko Stuebner <heiko@sntech.de>
> > +
> > +properties:
> > + compatible:
> > + enum:
> > + - rockchip,rk3288-crypto
> > + - rockchip,rk3328-crypto
> > + - rockchip,rk3399-crypto
>
> Waaaait, what? Only rockchip,rk3288-crypto is in original bindings.

Hello

Yes, my way is an error.
Next time, I will split my patch in 2, first a 1 to 1 conversion, then a binding update.

>
> > +
> > + reg:
> > + maxItems: 1
> > +
> > + interrupts:
> > + maxItems: 1
> > +
> > + clocks:
> > + minItems: 4
> > +
> > + clock-names:
> > + minItems: 4
> > +
> > + resets:
> > + maxItems: 1
>
> You missed reset-names.
>
> This patch is quite different than previous, in unexpected way. What
> happened here?
>
> > +
> > +if:
>
> Please define it after "allOf:", so it could be easily extended without
> changing indentation.
>
> > + properties:
> > + compatible:
> > + const: rockchip,rk3399-crypto
> > +then:
> > + properties:
> > + reg:
> > + minItems: 2
> > + interrupts:
> > + minItems: 2
>
> List interrupts. This is really different than your v1. It also looks
> different than original bindings and you did not mention any differences
> here, nor in the commit msg. Either explain in commit msg all
> differences (and why) or move them to separate commit.
>
> You seem to change the bindings a lot (new properties, different
> constraints, new compatibles), so this should all go to separate commit.
> Now it is just confusing.
>
> > + clocks:
> > + minItems: 6
>
> You need maxItems. Everywhere.
>
> > + clock-names:
> > + minItems: 6
>
> List all items.
>
> > + resets:
> > + minItems: 6
> > +else:
> > + if:
> > + properties:
> > + compatible:
> > + const: rockchip,rk3328-crypto
> > + then:
> > + properties:
> > + clocks:
> > + minItems: 3
> > + clock-names:
> > + minItems: 3
> > +
>

I have create a binding update patch (https://github.com/montjoie/linux/commit/da05ef9bb488c16cfd15a47054f5b1161829b6bf)
But I have lot of problem, DT are not validating.
Example: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/crypto/rockchip,rk3288-crypto.example.dtb: crypto@ff8a0000: resets: [[4294967295, 174]] is too short

I have tried also to set default resets/maxItems to 3 and setting it to 4 via an if. But I still got error like maxItems cannot be update after initial set.

Any idea on why my new binding update patch is failling ?

Regards