[PATCH 1/1] dt-bindings: net: dsa: nxp,sja1105: Add optional clock

[PATCH 1/1] dt-bindings: net: dsa: nxp,sja1105: Add optional clock

[Frank Li]

Add optional clock for OSC_IN and fix the below CHECK_DTBS warnings:
  arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/imx/imx6qp-prtwd3.dtb: switch@0 (nxp,sja1105q): Unevaluated properties are not allowed ('clocks' was unexpected)

Signed-off-by: Frank Li <Frank.Li@nxp.com>
---
 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/dsa/nxp,sja1105.yaml | 3 +++
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)

diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/dsa/nxp,sja1105.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/dsa/nxp,sja1105.yaml
index e9dd914b0734c..607b7fe8d28ee 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/dsa/nxp,sja1105.yaml
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/dsa/nxp,sja1105.yaml
@@ -41,6 +41,9 @@ properties:
       therefore discouraged.
     maxItems: 1
 
+  clocks:
+    maxItems: 1
+
   spi-cpha: true
   spi-cpol: true
 
-- 
2.34.1

Re: [PATCH 1/1] dt-bindings: net: dsa: nxp,sja1105: Add optional clock

[Conor Dooley]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 400 bytes --]

On Fri, Oct 10, 2025 at 02:34:17PM -0400, Frank Li wrote:
> Add optional clock for OSC_IN and fix the below CHECK_DTBS warnings:
>   arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/imx/imx6qp-prtwd3.dtb: switch@0 (nxp,sja1105q): Unevaluated properties are not allowed ('clocks' was unexpected)
> 
> Signed-off-by: Frank Li <Frank.Li@nxp.com>

Acked-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>
pw-bot: not-applicable

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 228 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH 1/1] dt-bindings: net: dsa: nxp,sja1105: Add optional clock

[Conor Dooley]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 655 bytes --]

On Tue, Oct 14, 2025 at 07:02:50PM +0100, Conor Dooley wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 10, 2025 at 02:34:17PM -0400, Frank Li wrote:
> > Add optional clock for OSC_IN and fix the below CHECK_DTBS warnings:
> >   arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/imx/imx6qp-prtwd3.dtb: switch@0 (nxp,sja1105q): Unevaluated properties are not allowed ('clocks' was unexpected)
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Frank Li <Frank.Li@nxp.com>
> 
> Acked-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>
> pw-bot: not-applicable

Hmm, I think this pw-bot command, intended for the dt patchwork has
probably screwed with the state in the netdev patchwork. Hopefully I can
fix that via
pw-bot: new



[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 228 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH 1/1] dt-bindings: net: dsa: nxp,sja1105: Add optional clock

[Jakub Kicinski]

On Tue, 14 Oct 2025 19:12:23 +0100 Conor Dooley wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 14, 2025 at 07:02:50PM +0100, Conor Dooley wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 10, 2025 at 02:34:17PM -0400, Frank Li wrote:  
> > > Add optional clock for OSC_IN and fix the below CHECK_DTBS warnings:
> > >   arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/imx/imx6qp-prtwd3.dtb: switch@0 (nxp,sja1105q): Unevaluated properties are not allowed ('clocks' was unexpected)
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Frank Li <Frank.Li@nxp.com>  
> > 
> > Acked-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>
> > pw-bot: not-applicable  
> 
> Hmm, I think this pw-bot command, intended for the dt patchwork has
> probably screwed with the state in the netdev patchwork. Hopefully I can
> fix that via

The pw-bot commands are a netdev+bpf thing :) They won't do anything
to dt patchwork. IOW the pw-bot is a different bot than the one that
replies when patch is applied.

Re: [PATCH 1/1] dt-bindings: net: dsa: nxp,sja1105: Add optional clock

[Conor Dooley]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1050 bytes --]

On Tue, Oct 14, 2025 at 12:02:13PM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Oct 2025 19:12:23 +0100 Conor Dooley wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 14, 2025 at 07:02:50PM +0100, Conor Dooley wrote:
> > > On Fri, Oct 10, 2025 at 02:34:17PM -0400, Frank Li wrote:  
> > > > Add optional clock for OSC_IN and fix the below CHECK_DTBS warnings:
> > > >   arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/imx/imx6qp-prtwd3.dtb: switch@0 (nxp,sja1105q): Unevaluated properties are not allowed ('clocks' was unexpected)
> > > > 
> > > > Signed-off-by: Frank Li <Frank.Li@nxp.com>  
> > > 
> > > Acked-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>
> > > pw-bot: not-applicable  
> > 
> > Hmm, I think this pw-bot command, intended for the dt patchwork has
> > probably screwed with the state in the netdev patchwork. Hopefully I can
> > fix that via
> 
> The pw-bot commands are a netdev+bpf thing :) They won't do anything
> to dt patchwork. IOW the pw-bot is a different bot than the one that
> replies when patch is applied.

Rob's recently added it to our patchwork too.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 228 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH 1/1] dt-bindings: net: dsa: nxp,sja1105: Add optional clock

[Vladimir Oltean]

On Fri, Oct 10, 2025 at 02:34:17PM -0400, Frank Li wrote:
> Add optional clock for OSC_IN and fix the below CHECK_DTBS warnings:
>   arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/imx/imx6qp-prtwd3.dtb: switch@0 (nxp,sja1105q): Unevaluated properties are not allowed ('clocks' was unexpected)
> 
> Signed-off-by: Frank Li <Frank.Li@nxp.com>
> ---
>  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/dsa/nxp,sja1105.yaml | 3 +++
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/dsa/nxp,sja1105.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/dsa/nxp,sja1105.yaml
> index e9dd914b0734c..607b7fe8d28ee 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/dsa/nxp,sja1105.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/dsa/nxp,sja1105.yaml
> @@ -41,6 +41,9 @@ properties:
>        therefore discouraged.
>      maxItems: 1
>  
> +  clocks:
> +    maxItems: 1
> +
>    spi-cpha: true
>    spi-cpol: true
>  
> -- 
> 2.34.1
> 

Reviewed-by: Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@nxp.com>

with the comment that you might want to add clk_prepare_enable() driver
support for it too. Someone who specifies a clock which isn't fixed
might be taken by surprise by the missing driver logic.

Re: [PATCH 1/1] dt-bindings: net: dsa: nxp,sja1105: Add optional clock

[Jakub Kicinski]

On Tue, 14 Oct 2025 20:35:04 +0100 Conor Dooley wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 14, 2025 at 12:02:13PM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > On Tue, 14 Oct 2025 19:12:23 +0100 Conor Dooley wrote:  
> > > Hmm, I think this pw-bot command, intended for the dt patchwork has
> > > probably screwed with the state in the netdev patchwork. Hopefully I can
> > > fix that via  
> > 
> > The pw-bot commands are a netdev+bpf thing :) They won't do anything
> > to dt patchwork. IOW the pw-bot is a different bot than the one that
> > replies when patch is applied.  
> 
> Rob's recently added it to our patchwork too.

:-o  Nice!

Do you know if it's the NIPA one or did he write his own?
I think we need to add support for some kind of project tagging 
to avoid changing state in each other's patchworks?

  pw-bot: xyz [project]

(with the [] brackets, not just meaning that the project is optional)

Re: [PATCH 1/1] dt-bindings: net: dsa: nxp,sja1105: Add optional clock

[Rob Herring]

On Tue, Oct 14, 2025 at 08:35:04PM +0100, Conor Dooley wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 14, 2025 at 12:02:13PM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > On Tue, 14 Oct 2025 19:12:23 +0100 Conor Dooley wrote:
> > > On Tue, Oct 14, 2025 at 07:02:50PM +0100, Conor Dooley wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Oct 10, 2025 at 02:34:17PM -0400, Frank Li wrote:  
> > > > > Add optional clock for OSC_IN and fix the below CHECK_DTBS warnings:
> > > > >   arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/imx/imx6qp-prtwd3.dtb: switch@0 (nxp,sja1105q): Unevaluated properties are not allowed ('clocks' was unexpected)
> > > > > 
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Frank Li <Frank.Li@nxp.com>  
> > > > 
> > > > Acked-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>
> > > > pw-bot: not-applicable  
> > > 
> > > Hmm, I think this pw-bot command, intended for the dt patchwork has
> > > probably screwed with the state in the netdev patchwork. Hopefully I can
> > > fix that via
> > 
> > The pw-bot commands are a netdev+bpf thing :) They won't do anything
> > to dt patchwork. IOW the pw-bot is a different bot than the one that
> > replies when patch is applied.
> 
> Rob's recently added it to our patchwork too.

And the issue is that both PW projects might get updated and both don't 
necessarily want the same state (like this case). So we need to 
distinguish. Perhaps like one of the following:

dt-pw-bot: <state>

or

pw-bot: <project> <state>

Rob

Re: [PATCH 1/1] dt-bindings: net: dsa: nxp,sja1105: Add optional clock

[Jakub Kicinski]

On Tue, 14 Oct 2025 15:48:07 -0500 Rob Herring wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 14, 2025 at 08:35:04PM +0100, Conor Dooley wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 14, 2025 at 12:02:13PM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:  
> > > The pw-bot commands are a netdev+bpf thing :) They won't do anything
> > > to dt patchwork. IOW the pw-bot is a different bot than the one that
> > > replies when patch is applied.  
> > 
> > Rob's recently added it to our patchwork too.  
> 
> And the issue is that both PW projects might get updated and both don't 
> necessarily want the same state (like this case). So we need to 
> distinguish. Perhaps like one of the following:
> 
> dt-pw-bot: <state>
> 
> or
> 
> pw-bot: <project> <state>

We crossed replies, do you mind

  pw-bot: xyz [project]

? I like the optional param after required, and the brackets may help
us disambiguate between optional params if there are more in the future.

Re: [PATCH 1/1] dt-bindings: net: dsa: nxp,sja1105: Add optional clock

[Rob Herring]

On Tue, Oct 14, 2025 at 8:13 PM Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 14 Oct 2025 15:48:07 -0500 Rob Herring wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 14, 2025 at 08:35:04PM +0100, Conor Dooley wrote:
> > > On Tue, Oct 14, 2025 at 12:02:13PM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > > > The pw-bot commands are a netdev+bpf thing :) They won't do anything
> > > > to dt patchwork. IOW the pw-bot is a different bot than the one that
> > > > replies when patch is applied.
> > >
> > > Rob's recently added it to our patchwork too.
> >
> > And the issue is that both PW projects might get updated and both don't
> > necessarily want the same state (like this case). So we need to
> > distinguish. Perhaps like one of the following:
> >
> > dt-pw-bot: <state>
> >
> > or
> >
> > pw-bot: <project> <state>
>
> We crossed replies, do you mind
>
>   pw-bot: xyz [project]
>
> ? I like the optional param after required, and the brackets may help
> us disambiguate between optional params if there are more in the future.

That's fine. Though it will be optional for you, but not us? We have
to ignore tags without the project if tags intended for netdev are
continued without the project. Or does no project mean I want to
update every project?

I also considered looking at who the email is from and restricting it
to the maintainers. I know the netdev one doesn't do that either
because I used it a couple of times. :) It does seem like it could be
abused.

Rob

Re: [PATCH 1/1] dt-bindings: net: dsa: nxp,sja1105: Add optional clock

[Andrew Lunn]

> I also considered looking at who the email is from and restricting it
> to the maintainers. I know the netdev one doesn't do that either
> because I used it a couple of times. :) It does seem like it could be
> abused.

The netdev one does have some restrictions.

https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/maintainer-netdev.html#updating-patch-status

says:

  The use of the bot is restricted to authors of the patches (the
  From: header on patch submission and command must match!),
  maintainers of the modified code according to the MAINTAINERS file
  (again, From: must match the MAINTAINERS entry) and a handful of
  senior reviewers.

Here is one example from you:

https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/patch/20241113225742.1784723-2-robh@kernel.org/

and it was your own patch.

All its actions are logged:

https://netdev.bots.linux.dev/pw-bot.html

so we can keep an eye of out for abuse. Plus, since it is an email to
patchwork, patchwork itself should have any abuse emails.

	Andrew

Re: [PATCH 1/1] dt-bindings: net: dsa: nxp,sja1105: Add optional clock

[Jakub Kicinski]

On Wed, 15 Oct 2025 06:53:01 -0500 Rob Herring wrote:
> > > And the issue is that both PW projects might get updated and both don't
> > > necessarily want the same state (like this case). So we need to
> > > distinguish. Perhaps like one of the following:
> > >
> > > dt-pw-bot: <state>
> > >
> > > or
> > >
> > > pw-bot: <project> <state>  
> >
> > We crossed replies, do you mind
> >
> >   pw-bot: xyz [project]
> >
> > ? I like the optional param after required, and the brackets may help
> > us disambiguate between optional params if there are more in the future.  
> 
> That's fine. Though it will be optional for you, but not us? We have
> to ignore tags without the project if tags intended for netdev are
> continued without the project. Or does no project mean I want to
> update every project?

Fair :( I imagine your workflow is that patches land in your pw, and
once a DT maintainer reviewed them you don't care about them any more?
So perhaps a better bot on your end would be a bot which listens to
Ack/Review tags from DT maintainers. When tag is received the patch
gets dropped from PW as "Handled Elsewhere", and patch id (or whatever 
that patch hash thing is called) gets recorded to automatically discard
pure reposts.

Would that work?

Re: [PATCH 1/1] dt-bindings: net: dsa: nxp,sja1105: Add optional clock

[patchwork-bot+netdevbpf]

Hello:

This patch was applied to netdev/net-next.git (main)
by Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>:

On Fri, 10 Oct 2025 14:34:17 -0400 you wrote:
> Add optional clock for OSC_IN and fix the below CHECK_DTBS warnings:
>   arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/imx/imx6qp-prtwd3.dtb: switch@0 (nxp,sja1105q): Unevaluated properties are not allowed ('clocks' was unexpected)
> 
> Signed-off-by: Frank Li <Frank.Li@nxp.com>
> ---
>  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/dsa/nxp,sja1105.yaml | 3 +++
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)

Here is the summary with links:
  - [1/1] dt-bindings: net: dsa: nxp,sja1105: Add optional clock
    https://git.kernel.org/netdev/net-next/c/6378e25ee1ca

You are awesome, thank you!
-- 
Deet-doot-dot, I am a bot.
https://korg.docs.kernel.org/patchwork/pwbot.html

Re: [PATCH 1/1] dt-bindings: net: dsa: nxp,sja1105: Add optional clock

[Rob Herring]

On Wed, Oct 15, 2025 at 9:25 AM Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 15 Oct 2025 06:53:01 -0500 Rob Herring wrote:
> > > > And the issue is that both PW projects might get updated and both don't
> > > > necessarily want the same state (like this case). So we need to
> > > > distinguish. Perhaps like one of the following:
> > > >
> > > > dt-pw-bot: <state>
> > > >
> > > > or
> > > >
> > > > pw-bot: <project> <state>
> > >
> > > We crossed replies, do you mind
> > >
> > >   pw-bot: xyz [project]
> > >
> > > ? I like the optional param after required, and the brackets may help
> > > us disambiguate between optional params if there are more in the future.
> >
> > That's fine. Though it will be optional for you, but not us? We have
> > to ignore tags without the project if tags intended for netdev are
> > continued without the project. Or does no project mean I want to
> > update every project?
>
> Fair :( I imagine your workflow is that patches land in your pw, and
> once a DT maintainer reviewed them you don't care about them any more?

Not exactly. Often I don't, but for example sometimes I need to apply
the patch (probably should setup a group tree, but it's enough of an
exception I haven't.).

> So perhaps a better bot on your end would be a bot which listens to
> Ack/Review tags from DT maintainers. When tag is received the patch
> gets dropped from PW as "Handled Elsewhere", and patch id (or whatever
> that patch hash thing is called) gets recorded to automatically discard
> pure reposts.

I already have that in place too. Well, kind of, it updates my
review/ack automatically on subsequent versions, but I currently do a
separate pass of what Conor and Krzysztof reviewed. Where the pw-bot
tags are useful is when there are changes requested. I suppose I could
look for replies from them without acks, but while that usually
indicates changes are needed, not always. So the pw-bot tag is useful
to say the other DT maintainers don't need to look at this patch at
all.

Rob

Re: [PATCH 1/1] dt-bindings: net: dsa: nxp,sja1105: Add optional clock

[Jakub Kicinski]

On Wed, 15 Oct 2025 12:32:14 -0500 Rob Herring wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 15, 2025 at 9:25 AM Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org> wrote:
> > On Wed, 15 Oct 2025 06:53:01 -0500 Rob Herring wrote:  
> > > That's fine. Though it will be optional for you, but not us? We have
> > > to ignore tags without the project if tags intended for netdev are
> > > continued without the project. Or does no project mean I want to
> > > update every project?  
> >
> > Fair :( I imagine your workflow is that patches land in your pw, and
> > once a DT maintainer reviewed them you don't care about them any more?  
> 
> Not exactly. Often I don't, but for example sometimes I need to apply
> the patch (probably should setup a group tree, but it's enough of an
> exception I haven't.).
> 
> > So perhaps a better bot on your end would be a bot which listens to
> > Ack/Review tags from DT maintainers. When tag is received the patch
> > gets dropped from PW as "Handled Elsewhere", and patch id (or whatever
> > that patch hash thing is called) gets recorded to automatically discard
> > pure reposts.  
> 
> I already have that in place too. Well, kind of, it updates my
> review/ack automatically on subsequent versions, but I currently do a
> separate pass of what Conor and Krzysztof reviewed. Where the pw-bot
> tags are useful is when there are changes requested. I suppose I could
> look for replies from them without acks, but while that usually
> indicates changes are needed, not always. So the pw-bot tag is useful
> to say the other DT maintainers don't need to look at this patch at
> all.

I don't think we need to do anything, then. Changes-requested will 
apply across all the patchwork instances. Only not-applicable /
handled-elsewhere gets tricky with multiple instances.

Re: [PATCH 1/1] dt-bindings: net: dsa: nxp,sja1105: Add optional clock

[Conor Dooley]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2984 bytes --]

On Wed, Oct 15, 2025 at 10:53:23AM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Oct 2025 12:32:14 -0500 Rob Herring wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 15, 2025 at 9:25 AM Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org> wrote:
> > > On Wed, 15 Oct 2025 06:53:01 -0500 Rob Herring wrote:  
> > > > That's fine. Though it will be optional for you, but not us? We have
> > > > to ignore tags without the project if tags intended for netdev are
> > > > continued without the project. Or does no project mean I want to
> > > > update every project?  
> > >
> > > Fair :( I imagine your workflow is that patches land in your pw, and
> > > once a DT maintainer reviewed them you don't care about them any more?  
> > 
> > Not exactly. Often I don't, but for example sometimes I need to apply
> > the patch (probably should setup a group tree, but it's enough of an
> > exception I haven't.).

I think myself and Krzysztof (well, I can only really speak for myself)
have some idea about what things are likely to be material for the dt
tree. I just don't set a status for them if I interact or I outright
leave them for Rob.

> > > So perhaps a better bot on your end would be a bot which listens to
> > > Ack/Review tags from DT maintainers. When tag is received the patch
> > > gets dropped from PW as "Handled Elsewhere", and patch id (or whatever
> > > that patch hash thing is called) gets recorded to automatically discard
> > > pure reposts.  
> > 
> > I already have that in place too. Well, kind of, it updates my
> > review/ack automatically on subsequent versions, but I currently do a
> > separate pass of what Conor and Krzysztof reviewed. Where the pw-bot
> > tags are useful is when there are changes requested. I suppose I could
> > look for replies from them without acks, but while that usually
> > indicates changes are needed, not always. So the pw-bot tag is useful
> > to say the other DT maintainers don't need to look at this patch at
> > all.

Yeah, I think it's better to leave it explicit. Often a non-tag reply is
looking for clarification before providing one. Both Krzysztof and I
maintain platforms and minor subsystems (very minor in my case) so
there's b4-ty or manual patch acceptance emails too that obviously are
not requesting changes!

> I don't think we need to do anything, then. Changes-requested will 
> apply across all the patchwork instances. Only not-applicable /
> handled-elsewhere gets tricky with multiple instances.

I'm sort of unclear about what to do here. What would make sense to me
is that the bots disallow each other's maintainers to set the
not-applicable or handled-elsewhere states, since those are the ones
with unintended consequences if set in the wrong place, like I did here.

"I don't think we need to do anything" sounds like I can do
changes-requested when I feel like it, but need to be careful about
netdev when I do others, which is fine, I just need to know where I
stand.

Cheers,
Conor.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 228 bytes --]