From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Will Deacon Subject: Re: [PATCH 13/36] dt-bindings: arm: Convert PMU binding to json-schema Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2018 11:34:51 +0100 Message-ID: <20181019103451.GB14246@arm.com> References: <20181005165848.3474-1-robh@kernel.org> <20181005165848.3474-14-robh@kernel.org> <20181009115713.GE6248@arm.com> <20181010165048.GB16512@arm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Rob Herring Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , devicetree@vger.kernel.org, "moderated list:ARM/FREESCALE IMX / MXC ARM ARCHITECTURE" , linuxppc-dev , Grant Likely , Kumar Gala , Frank Rowand , Mark Rutland , Linus Walleij , Olof Johansson , Arnd Bergmann , Mark Brown , Tom Rini , Pantelis Antoniou , Geert Uytterhoeven , Jonathan Cameron , Bjorn Andersson List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org Hi Rob, On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 01:51:24PM -0500, Rob Herring wrote: > On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 11:50 AM Will Deacon wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 09, 2018 at 01:14:02PM -0500, Rob Herring wrote: > > > I guess the single interrupt case is less obvious now with no > > > description (it's the first list item of 'oneOf'). The schema If the > > > single interrupt is not supported, then we can drop it here. > > > > Well the description says "1 interrupt per core" which is incorrect. > > You are reading the schema wrong. There are 2 cases supported as > defined by each '-'. The 2nd case is all the keywords until the > indentation decreases. So 'description' is just description of the 2nd > case. The first case is just "maxItems: 1". I probably didn't put a > description because why write in free form text what the schema says > (other than of course no one knows json-schema...). Apologies, I've not read one of these things before and looks like I completely misread it. > YAML combines the best of Makefiles and python. You can't have tabs > and Indentation is significant. :) Oh wow, I'm in way over my head here! > > I also > > don't understand why maxItems is 8. > > Humm, I probably just made that up based on GICv2 limitations. What > should it be? If there's not any inherit maximum, can we put something > reasonable? There's not really any way to express that it should match > the number of cores in the system. What's the largest number you can think of? Will