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

[LABBE Corentin <clabbe@baylibre.com>]

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