From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C38EE1D131B; Wed, 2 Oct 2024 21:41:30 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1727905292; cv=none; b=NhpFBc8pv/J1bsO7WziR271WF2rWQWIrVnkQTDiHKDYHQvJ5hlmL7+t9JsbaV0JyuBt0QMio1EA5MAz1THNs7yAl3cYOAx/qoI3aXhPHU7krdhdaZekVIELSFeVz6gQ5XQKGUjGCRJmCwGQWtqJnb4Lmwg6tvS0PyUdjh/bhLOY= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1727905292; c=relaxed/simple; bh=MhCybmHtvHC9lNdIeEmiXoehkqXFqlzKTsDQ0Q7WLRI=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=PrJzfgh7QJzq5NW3QJIRDwtRk64PCda/OiXAJTyUoiAXX8Q4fOry0HMXwX261nRFYKGySaMolKAgLS2/lKcfxgDalGJpN1gY/A7k417UepNxd2WWRan5IWqo+5/vj+99kZVjy5aPo8SiSvFt68hdSlaaMmfoQMV+DtbwzimV250= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=XvFdxoa2; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="XvFdxoa2" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3E25EC4CEC2; Wed, 2 Oct 2024 21:41:30 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1727905290; bh=MhCybmHtvHC9lNdIeEmiXoehkqXFqlzKTsDQ0Q7WLRI=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=XvFdxoa2dpgVrMZnOltYN8stAk4+Ke6MW6IomUDz5jEwpj3L5VJDEqKCATIpOsC7H hYd/YH2cP2eIEzddFsR/HpjJ8A5hYzlDkMC85CxcimtwHAzRqwZnsu5YaCH2hG5W+I okdyeL1bfrJnlASIUxNeooNbYjeFvGjPHphRtz6gt8kegKihJG6jXKoz4FJg6rO5hu J6+jX9LhdU5fUJQFcupBOd+nPQ2PMQCqSFoLIsBQIvX7LAV4pkN3EqK2xOAHOcCFCi SAjVSnsPPK93OJkYgpfnhX4mqZs8H2LXgl80Ynygp9KCeQJ/1b43+77YH9sc51Lg1J dFSKORiF7JTiw== Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2024 16:41:29 -0500 From: Rob Herring To: Krzysztof Kozlowski Cc: Michal Simek , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, monstr@monstr.eu, michal.simek@xilinx.com, git@xilinx.com, Alvin =?utf-8?Q?=C5=A0ipraga?= , Conor Dooley , Krzysztof Kozlowski , Michael Turquette , Stephen Boyd , "open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS" , "open list:COMMON CLK FRAMEWORK" Subject: Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: clock: si5351: Make compatible string required property Message-ID: <20241002214129.GA1347474-robh@kernel.org> References: <74e07428-2ed4-47e2-a8ef-360df0252e17@amd.com> <7695cae2-33a3-4879-b8e5-d296d81ffece@amd.com> <938253b4-91d3-4217-a2c5-d8bd707f0e47@kernel.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: devicetree@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <938253b4-91d3-4217-a2c5-d8bd707f0e47@kernel.org> On Wed, Oct 02, 2024 at 02:17:22PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 02/10/2024 12:31, Michal Simek wrote: > > > > > > On 10/2/24 10:24, Michal Simek wrote: > >> > >> > >> On 10/2/24 10:19, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > >>> On 02/10/2024 09:51, Michal Simek wrote: > >>>> Compatible property is likely also required property. > >>>> > >>>> Signed-off-by: Michal Simek > >>>> --- > >>> > >>> That's a convention but not necessary, a no-op. > >> > >> But how do you identify device then? > >> Or are you saying that device description is valid even if there is no > >> compatible string? > > > > One more thing > > commit 524dfbc4e9fc ("dt-bindings: clock: si5351: convert to yaml") is showing > > that compatible property was required in txt file. > > > > -Required properties: > > -- compatible: shall be one of the following: > > - "silabs,si5351a" - Si5351a, QFN20 package > > - "silabs,si5351a-msop" - Si5351a, MSOP10 package > > > > I can update commit message to describe it too. > > Devices do not work without compatible, so this is obvious... and like > said - it is already required, so the change is redundant. Does not > harm, though. To put it another way, by the time the schema is applied, we already know that compatible is present because that is *how* the schema gets applied in the first place. Rob