[PATCH 00/18] MIPS: DTS: fix some findings by "make ci20_defconfig dt_binding_check dtbs_check"

[PATCH 00/18] MIPS: DTS: fix some findings by "make ci20_defconfig dt_binding_check dtbs_check"

[H. Nikolaus Schaller]

PATCH V1 2022-04-08 20:38:00:
This series fixes many (not all) warnings from dt_binding_check/dtbs_check for the jz4780 based Imagination CI20 board.


H. Nikolaus Schaller (18):
  MIPS: DTS: jz4780: remove cpu clock-names as reported by dtbscheck
  MIPS: DTS: jz4780: fix cgu as reported by dtbscheck
  MIPS: DTS: jz4780: fix tcu timer as reported by dtbscheck
  MIPS: DTS: jz4780: fix ost timer as reported by dtbscheck
  MIPS: DTS: jz4780: fix pinctrl as reported by dtbscheck
  MIPS: DTS: jz4780: fix rtc node as reported by dtbscheck
  MIPS: DTS: jz4780: fix otg node as reported by dtbscheck
  MIPS: DTS: jz4780: fix lcd controllers as reported by dtbscheck
  MIPS: DTS: jz4780: fix dma-controller as reported by dtbscheck
  MIPS: DTS: jz4780: fix uart dmas as reported by dtbscheck
  MIPS: DTS: jz4780: fix i2c dmas as reported by dtbscheck
  MIPS: DTS: jz4780: fix nemc memory controller as reported by dtbscheck
  dt-bindings: fix jz4780-nemc issue as reported by dtbscheck
  MIPS: DTS: CI20: add missing model as reported by dtbscheck
  MIPS: DTS: CI20: fix fixed regulators as reported by dtbscheck
  MIPS: DTS: CI20: fix /memory as reported by dtbscheck
  MIPS: DTS: CI20: fix wifi as reported by dtbscheck
  MIPS: DTS: CI20: fix bluetooth as reported by dtbscheck

 .../memory-controllers/ingenic,nemc.yaml      |  2 +-
 arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dts           | 14 ++--
 arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi        | 71 ++++++++++++++-----
 3 files changed, 64 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)

-- 
2.33.0

[PATCH 01/18] MIPS: DTS: jz4780: remove cpu clock-names as reported by dtbscheck

[H. Nikolaus Schaller]

arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: cpu@0: clock-names does not match any of the regexes: pinctrl-[0-9]+
	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mips/ingenic/ingenic,cpu.yaml
arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: cpu@1: clock-names does not match any of the regexes: pinctrl-[0-9]+
	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mips/ingenic/ingenic,cpu.yaml

Signed-off-by: H. Nikolaus Schaller <hns@goldelico.com>
---
 arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi | 2 --
 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi b/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi
index b998301f179ce..710605df40ed3 100644
--- a/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi
+++ b/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi
@@ -18,7 +18,6 @@ cpu0: cpu@0 {
 			reg = <0>;
 
 			clocks = <&cgu JZ4780_CLK_CPU>;
-			clock-names = "cpu";
 		};
 
 		cpu1: cpu@1 {
@@ -27,7 +26,6 @@ cpu1: cpu@1 {
 			reg = <1>;
 
 			clocks = <&cgu JZ4780_CLK_CORE1>;
-			clock-names = "cpu";
 		};
 	};
 
-- 
2.33.0

Re: [PATCH 01/18] MIPS: DTS: jz4780: remove cpu clock-names as reported by dtbscheck

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 08/04/2022 20:37, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
> arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: cpu@0: clock-names does not match any of the regexes: pinctrl-[0-9]+
> 	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mips/ingenic/ingenic,cpu.yaml
> arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: cpu@1: clock-names does not match any of the regexes: pinctrl-[0-9]+
> 	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mips/ingenic/ingenic,cpu.yaml

No need to put the same warning twice (cpu index really does not
matter). One warning is enough.

Fixing warnings is good, but what if the property should be there and
the bindings are not correct? If you know the answer, please add it to
the commit msg.

This applies to all your patches. Blind fixing of DTS warnings my
produce incorrect results. :(


Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>


Best regards,
Krzysztof

Re: [PATCH 01/18] MIPS: DTS: jz4780: remove cpu clock-names as reported by dtbscheck

[H. Nikolaus Schaller]

Hi Krzysztof,

> Am 09.04.2022 um 13:07 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>:
> 
> On 08/04/2022 20:37, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
>> arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: cpu@0: clock-names does not match any of the regexes: pinctrl-[0-9]+
>> 	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mips/ingenic/ingenic,cpu.yaml
>> arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: cpu@1: clock-names does not match any of the regexes: pinctrl-[0-9]+
>> 	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mips/ingenic/ingenic,cpu.yaml
> 
> No need to put the same warning twice (cpu index really does not
> matter). One warning is enough.

Well, how can you as a reviewer see immediately that dtbscheck
warns for both instances and that they are both really fixed by the
complete patch?

Assume there were only the first one mentioned and the second one
forgotten to fix...

If it is not included here (completely), you have to run dtbscheck 
yourself to see that there are two instances involved. Or deduce it
from looking into the source file.

In both cases much more work for you or other reviewers.

This is why I have kept this redundancy. One commit hunk for every
warning line.

And it may only look redundant in the commit message, not in code 
where it would really hurt to have duplication.

> 
> Fixing warnings is good, but what if the property should be there and
> the bindings are not correct? If you know the answer, please add it to
> the commit msg.

It has of course been tested on real hardware.
There was only one case where the bindings seem to be wrong (patch 13/18).

And usually I simply assume such generic bindings are tested on many
other platforms and therefore the reference. What are bindings and
dtbscheck good for if we doubt them as DTS developers?

> This applies to all your patches. Blind fixing of DTS warnings my
> produce incorrect results. :(

Every patch of this series has been tested on real hardware to have
no negative side-effects.

> Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>
> 
> 
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof

BR and thanks,
Nikolaus

Re: [PATCH 01/18] MIPS: DTS: jz4780: remove cpu clock-names as reported by dtbscheck

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 09/04/2022 15:02, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
> Hi Krzysztof,
> 
>> Am 09.04.2022 um 13:07 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>:
>>
>> On 08/04/2022 20:37, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
>>> arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: cpu@0: clock-names does not match any of the regexes: pinctrl-[0-9]+
>>> 	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mips/ingenic/ingenic,cpu.yaml
>>> arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: cpu@1: clock-names does not match any of the regexes: pinctrl-[0-9]+
>>> 	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mips/ingenic/ingenic,cpu.yaml
>>
>> No need to put the same warning twice (cpu index really does not
>> matter). One warning is enough.
> 
> Well, how can you as a reviewer see immediately that dtbscheck
> warns for both instances and that they are both really fixed by the
> complete patch?
> 
> Assume there were only the first one mentioned and the second one
> forgotten to fix...
> 
> If it is not included here (completely), you have to run dtbscheck 
> yourself to see that there are two instances involved. Or deduce it
> from looking into the source file.
> 
> In both cases much more work for you or other reviewers.
> 
> This is why I have kept this redundancy. One commit hunk for every
> warning line.
> 
> And it may only look redundant in the commit message, not in code 
> where it would really hurt to have duplication.

Sorry, but the second warning is obvious. It really does not bring any
information and better to keep things simple and concise. Concise helps
to read/understand the commit.

> 
>>
>> Fixing warnings is good, but what if the property should be there and
>> the bindings are not correct? If you know the answer, please add it to
>> the commit msg.
> 
> It has of course been tested on real hardware.

Good, but it's not everything. DTS is a description of hardware and we
might want to have the extended description, e.g. with clock-names.

> There was only one case where the bindings seem to be wrong (patch 13/18).
> 
> And usually I simply assume such generic bindings are tested on many
> other platforms and therefore the reference. What are bindings and
> dtbscheck good for if we doubt them as DTS developers?

You should always doubt, knowing how incompletely or poorly bindings
were written or converted (including the ones I was doing myself).

> 
>> This applies to all your patches. Blind fixing of DTS warnings my
>> produce incorrect results. :(
> 
> Every patch of this series has been tested on real hardware to have
> no negative side-effects.

Which is not everything. DTS might be used in other projects - did you
test them as well?


Best regards,
Krzysztof

[PATCH 02/18] MIPS: DTS: jz4780: fix cgu as reported by dtbscheck

[H. Nikolaus Schaller]

arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: jz4780-cgu@10000000: $nodename:0: 'jz4780-cgu@10000000' does not match '^clock-controller@[0-9a-f]+$'
	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/ingenic,cgu.yaml

Signed-off-by: H. Nikolaus Schaller <hns@goldelico.com>
---
 arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi b/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi
index 710605df40ed3..6fb6229c3186b 100644
--- a/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi
+++ b/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi
@@ -58,7 +58,7 @@ rtc: rtc {
 		clock-frequency = <32768>;
 	};
 
-	cgu: jz4780-cgu@10000000 {
+	cgu: clock-controller@10000000 {
 		compatible = "ingenic,jz4780-cgu", "simple-mfd";
 		reg = <0x10000000 0x100>;
 		#address-cells = <1>;
-- 
2.33.0

Re: [PATCH 02/18] MIPS: DTS: jz4780: fix cgu as reported by dtbscheck

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 08/04/2022 20:37, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
> arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: jz4780-cgu@10000000: $nodename:0: 'jz4780-cgu@10000000' does not match '^clock-controller@[0-9a-f]+$'
> 	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/ingenic,cgu.yaml
> 
> Signed-off-by: H. Nikolaus Schaller <hns@goldelico.com>
> ---
>  arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 


Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>


Best regards,
Krzysztof

[PATCH 03/18] MIPS: DTS: jz4780: fix tcu timer as reported by dtbscheck

[H. Nikolaus Schaller]

arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: timer@10002000: compatible: 'oneOf' conditional failed, one must be fixed:
	['ingenic,jz4780-tcu', 'ingenic,jz4770-tcu', 'simple-mfd'] is too long
	'ingenic,jz4780-tcu' is not one of ['ingenic,jz4740-tcu', 'ingenic,jz4725b-tcu', 'ingenic,jz4760-tcu', 'ingenic,x1000-tcu']
	'simple-mfd' was expected
	'ingenic,jz4760-tcu' was expected
	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/timer/ingenic,tcu.yaml

Signed-off-by: H. Nikolaus Schaller <hns@goldelico.com>
---
 arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi b/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi
index 6fb6229c3186b..6027f14c393e3 100644
--- a/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi
+++ b/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi
@@ -91,7 +91,7 @@ rng: rng@d8 {
 
 	tcu: timer@10002000 {
 		compatible = "ingenic,jz4780-tcu",
-			     "ingenic,jz4770-tcu",
+			     "ingenic,jz4760-tcu",
 			     "simple-mfd";
 		reg = <0x10002000 0x1000>;
 		#address-cells = <1>;
-- 
2.33.0

Re: [PATCH 03/18] MIPS: DTS: jz4780: fix tcu timer as reported by dtbscheck

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 08/04/2022 20:37, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
> arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: timer@10002000: compatible: 'oneOf' conditional failed, one must be fixed:
> 	['ingenic,jz4780-tcu', 'ingenic,jz4770-tcu', 'simple-mfd'] is too long
> 	'ingenic,jz4780-tcu' is not one of ['ingenic,jz4740-tcu', 'ingenic,jz4725b-tcu', 'ingenic,jz4760-tcu', 'ingenic,x1000-tcu']
> 	'simple-mfd' was expected
> 	'ingenic,jz4760-tcu' was expected

Trim it a bit...

> 	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/timer/ingenic,tcu.yaml

You need to explain this. You're changing the effective compatible of
the device and doing so based only on schema warning does not look
enough. Please write real reason instead of this fat warning, e.g. that
both devices are actually compatible and this has no real effect except
schema checks.

Best regards,
Krzysztof

Re: [PATCH 03/18] MIPS: DTS: jz4780: fix tcu timer as reported by dtbscheck

[Paul Cercueil]

Hi Krzysztof,

Le sam., avril 9 2022 at 13:11:48 +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski 
<krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> a écrit :
> On 08/04/2022 20:37, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
>>  arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: timer@10002000: compatible: 
>> 'oneOf' conditional failed, one must be fixed:
>>  	['ingenic,jz4780-tcu', 'ingenic,jz4770-tcu', 'simple-mfd'] is too 
>> long
>>  	'ingenic,jz4780-tcu' is not one of ['ingenic,jz4740-tcu', 
>> 'ingenic,jz4725b-tcu', 'ingenic,jz4760-tcu', 'ingenic,x1000-tcu']
>>  	'simple-mfd' was expected
>>  	'ingenic,jz4760-tcu' was expected
> 
> Trim it a bit...
> 
>>  	From schema: 
>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/timer/ingenic,tcu.yaml
> 
> You need to explain this. You're changing the effective compatible of
> the device and doing so based only on schema warning does not look
> enough. Please write real reason instead of this fat warning, e.g. 
> that
> both devices are actually compatible and this has no real effect 
> except
> schema checks.

Well, if the schema says that it should use a particular fallback 
string, then that's what the DTS should use, right?

If making the DTS schema-compliant causes breakages, then that means 
the schema is wrong and should be fixed.

Cheers,
-Paul

Re: [PATCH 03/18] MIPS: DTS: jz4780: fix tcu timer as reported by dtbscheck

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 09/04/2022 14:24, Paul Cercueil wrote:
> Hi Krzysztof,
> 
> Le sam., avril 9 2022 at 13:11:48 +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski 
> <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> a écrit :
>> On 08/04/2022 20:37, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
>>>  arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: timer@10002000: compatible: 
>>> 'oneOf' conditional failed, one must be fixed:
>>>  	['ingenic,jz4780-tcu', 'ingenic,jz4770-tcu', 'simple-mfd'] is too 
>>> long
>>>  	'ingenic,jz4780-tcu' is not one of ['ingenic,jz4740-tcu', 
>>> 'ingenic,jz4725b-tcu', 'ingenic,jz4760-tcu', 'ingenic,x1000-tcu']
>>>  	'simple-mfd' was expected
>>>  	'ingenic,jz4760-tcu' was expected
>>
>> Trim it a bit...
>>
>>>  	From schema: 
>>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/timer/ingenic,tcu.yaml
>>
>> You need to explain this. You're changing the effective compatible of
>> the device and doing so based only on schema warning does not look
>> enough. Please write real reason instead of this fat warning, e.g. 
>> that
>> both devices are actually compatible and this has no real effect 
>> except
>> schema checks.
> 
> Well, if the schema says that it should use a particular fallback 
> string, then that's what the DTS should use, right?

Or the schema is wrong. :)

> If making the DTS schema-compliant causes breakages, then that means 
> the schema is wrong and should be fixed.

Exactly, so the commit needs a bit of explanation why one solution was
chosen over the other. BTW, I am not saying that schema or DTS is wrong,
just that commit is not explained enough.

Best regards,
Krzysztof

Re: [PATCH 03/18] MIPS: DTS: jz4780: fix tcu timer as reported by dtbscheck

[H. Nikolaus Schaller]

> Am 09.04.2022 um 14:38 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>:
> 
> On 09/04/2022 14:24, Paul Cercueil wrote:
>> Hi Krzysztof,
>> 
>> Le sam., avril 9 2022 at 13:11:48 +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski 
>> <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> a écrit :
>>> On 08/04/2022 20:37, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
>>>> arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: timer@10002000: compatible: 
>>>> 'oneOf' conditional failed, one must be fixed:
>>>> 	['ingenic,jz4780-tcu', 'ingenic,jz4770-tcu', 'simple-mfd'] is too 
>>>> long
>>>> 	'ingenic,jz4780-tcu' is not one of ['ingenic,jz4740-tcu', 
>>>> 'ingenic,jz4725b-tcu', 'ingenic,jz4760-tcu', 'ingenic,x1000-tcu']
>>>> 	'simple-mfd' was expected
>>>> 	'ingenic,jz4760-tcu' was expected
>>> 
>>> Trim it a bit...
>>> 
>>>> 	From schema: 
>>>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/timer/ingenic,tcu.yaml
>>> 
>>> You need to explain this. You're changing the effective compatible of
>>> the device and doing so based only on schema warning does not look
>>> enough. Please write real reason instead of this fat warning, e.g. 
>>> that
>>> both devices are actually compatible and this has no real effect 
>>> except
>>> schema checks.
>> 
>> Well, if the schema says that it should use a particular fallback 
>> string, then that's what the DTS should use, right?
> 
> Or the schema is wrong. :)
> 
>> If making the DTS schema-compliant causes breakages, then that means 
>> the schema is wrong and should be fixed.

Well, in this case making the DTS fit the schema does not break.
So why think or explain why the schema is right?

> 
> Exactly, so the commit needs a bit of explanation why one solution was
> chosen over the other. BTW, I am not saying that schema or DTS is wrong,
> just that commit is not explained enough.
> 
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof

Re: [PATCH 03/18] MIPS: DTS: jz4780: fix tcu timer as reported by dtbscheck

[H. Nikolaus Schaller]

> Am 09.04.2022 um 13:11 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>:
> 
> On 08/04/2022 20:37, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
>> arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: timer@10002000: compatible: 'oneOf' conditional failed, one must be fixed:
>> 	['ingenic,jz4780-tcu', 'ingenic,jz4770-tcu', 'simple-mfd'] is too long
>> 	'ingenic,jz4780-tcu' is not one of ['ingenic,jz4740-tcu', 'ingenic,jz4725b-tcu', 'ingenic,jz4760-tcu', 'ingenic,x1000-tcu']
>> 	'simple-mfd' was expected
>> 	'ingenic,jz4760-tcu' was expected
> 
> Trim it a bit...
> 
>> 	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/timer/ingenic,tcu.yaml
> 
> You need to explain this. You're changing the effective compatible of
> the device and doing so based only on schema warning does not look
> enough. Please write real reason instead of this fat warning, e.g. that
> both devices are actually compatible and this has no real effect except
> schema checks.

both use jz4740_soc_info / jz4770_soc_info and there is no ingenic,jz4780-tcu...
So it doesn't change function, just makes it fit to the bindings.

We could solve it differently add ingenic,jz4780-tcu to bindings and the
driver compatible table.

Re: [PATCH 03/18] MIPS: DTS: jz4780: fix tcu timer as reported by dtbscheck

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 09/04/2022 15:03, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
> 
> 
>> Am 09.04.2022 um 13:11 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>:
>>
>> On 08/04/2022 20:37, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
>>> arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: timer@10002000: compatible: 'oneOf' conditional failed, one must be fixed:
>>> 	['ingenic,jz4780-tcu', 'ingenic,jz4770-tcu', 'simple-mfd'] is too long
>>> 	'ingenic,jz4780-tcu' is not one of ['ingenic,jz4740-tcu', 'ingenic,jz4725b-tcu', 'ingenic,jz4760-tcu', 'ingenic,x1000-tcu']
>>> 	'simple-mfd' was expected
>>> 	'ingenic,jz4760-tcu' was expected
>>
>> Trim it a bit...
>>
>>> 	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/timer/ingenic,tcu.yaml
>>
>> You need to explain this. You're changing the effective compatible of
>> the device and doing so based only on schema warning does not look
>> enough. Please write real reason instead of this fat warning, e.g. that
>> both devices are actually compatible and this has no real effect except
>> schema checks.
> 
> both use jz4740_soc_info / jz4770_soc_info and there is no ingenic,jz4780-tcu...
> So it doesn't change function, just makes it fit to the bindings.
> 
> We could solve it differently add ingenic,jz4780-tcu to bindings and the
> driver compatible table.

Just please use it in commit msg instead of or next to the warning.
Don't focus on the bindings check but focus on actual hardware and its
description.

Best regards,
Krzysztof

Re: [PATCH 03/18] MIPS: DTS: jz4780: fix tcu timer as reported by dtbscheck

[H. Nikolaus Schaller]

> Am 09.04.2022 um 15:11 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>:
> 
> On 09/04/2022 15:03, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>> Am 09.04.2022 um 13:11 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>:
>>> 
>>> On 08/04/2022 20:37, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
>>>> arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: timer@10002000: compatible: 'oneOf' conditional failed, one must be fixed:
>>>> 	['ingenic,jz4780-tcu', 'ingenic,jz4770-tcu', 'simple-mfd'] is too long
>>>> 	'ingenic,jz4780-tcu' is not one of ['ingenic,jz4740-tcu', 'ingenic,jz4725b-tcu', 'ingenic,jz4760-tcu', 'ingenic,x1000-tcu']
>>>> 	'simple-mfd' was expected
>>>> 	'ingenic,jz4760-tcu' was expected
>>> 
>>> Trim it a bit...
>>> 
>>>> 	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/timer/ingenic,tcu.yaml
>>> 
>>> You need to explain this. You're changing the effective compatible of
>>> the device and doing so based only on schema warning does not look
>>> enough. Please write real reason instead of this fat warning, e.g. that
>>> both devices are actually compatible and this has no real effect except
>>> schema checks.
>> 
>> both use jz4740_soc_info / jz4770_soc_info and there is no ingenic,jz4780-tcu...
>> So it doesn't change function, just makes it fit to the bindings.
>> 
>> We could solve it differently add ingenic,jz4780-tcu to bindings and the
>> driver compatible table.
> 
> Just please use it in commit msg instead of or next to the warning.
> Don't focus on the bindings check but focus on actual hardware and its
> description.

Well, again, my assumption is that bindings and .yaml files formally describe the actual
hardware components. And they have been reviewed.

So they have a higher level of authority than any current driver or .dts implementation.
Unless there is evidence that the bindings are wrong.

I.e. if the bindings feel right why is there a need to argue for that?

It is like test-driven development model. There you have to write code that passes
the tests. Not argue against the tests.

BR and thanks,
Nikolaus

Re: [PATCH 03/18] MIPS: DTS: jz4780: fix tcu timer as reported by dtbscheck

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 09/04/2022 15:18, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
> 
> Well, again, my assumption is that bindings and .yaml files formally describe the actual
> hardware components. And they have been reviewed.

The bindings try to describe it. They are pretty often incomplete or
might have mistakes. The true reason of doing a change is not that some
tool tells you "do like this". The true reason is because the change
properly describes hardware.

> 
> So they have a higher level of authority than any current driver or .dts implementation.
> Unless there is evidence that the bindings are wrong.

This is just a tool, not an authority.

> I.e. if the bindings feel right why is there a need to argue for that?

Because doing things "just because bindings told me" hides the true
explanation and makes the code review, code management more difficult.
Later person will look at this and wonder why this was done like this.
If you write "because some tool me" this is not a good help. But if you
write "because hardware is like this exactly" this is proper comment.

> 
> It is like test-driven development model. There you have to write code that passes
> the tests. Not argue against the tests.

Again, don't focus on the tool... Tool is just a tool...

Best regards,
Krzysztof

Re: [PATCH 03/18] MIPS: DTS: jz4780: fix tcu timer as reported by dtbscheck

[H. Nikolaus Schaller]

> Am 09.04.2022 um 15:22 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>:
> 
> On 09/04/2022 15:18, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
>> 
>> Well, again, my assumption is that bindings and .yaml files formally describe the actual
>> hardware components. And they have been reviewed.
> 
> The bindings try to describe it. They are pretty often incomplete or
> might have mistakes.

Indeed they have. But what If I have found that they are right. Why should I comment on that?
It should at least be the default assumption.

> The true reason of doing a change is not that some
> tool tells you "do like this". The true reason is because the change
> properly describes hardware.
> 
>> 
>> So they have a higher level of authority than any current driver or .dts implementation.
>> Unless there is evidence that the bindings are wrong.
> 
> This is just a tool, not an authority.
> 
>> I.e. if the bindings feel right why is there a need to argue for that?
> 
> Because doing things "just because bindings told me" hides the true
> explanation and makes the code review, code management more difficult.

Well, I always wonder why schemas were done that way they were done
since their introduction. If I would write down commetns every time nobody
would be happy...

> Later person will look at this and wonder why this was done like this.
> If you write "because some tool me" this is not a good help. But if you
> write "because hardware is like this exactly" this is proper comment.
> 
>> 
>> It is like test-driven development model. There you have to write code that passes
>> the tests. Not argue against the tests.
> 
> Again, don't focus on the tool... Tool is just a tool...

A tool I can't ignore because Rob's robot tells me it is "the truth"...

BR and thanks,
Nikolaus

[PATCH 04/18] MIPS: DTS: jz4780: fix ost timer as reported by dtbscheck

[H. Nikolaus Schaller]

arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: timer@10002000: timer@e0:compatible: 'oneOf' conditional failed, one must be fixed:
	['ingenic,jz4780-ost', 'ingenic,jz4770-ost'] is too long
	'ingenic,jz4780-ost' is not one of ['ingenic,jz4725b-ost', 'ingenic,jz4760b-ost']
	'ingenic,jz4760-ost' was expected
	'ingenic,jz4725b-ost' was expected
	'ingenic,jz4760b-ost' was expected
	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/timer/ingenic,tcu.yaml

Signed-off-by: H. Nikolaus Schaller <hns@goldelico.com>
---
 arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi b/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi
index 6027f14c393e3..5f44cf004d473 100644
--- a/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi
+++ b/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi
@@ -134,7 +134,7 @@ pwm: pwm@40 {
 		};
 
 		ost: timer@e0 {
-			compatible = "ingenic,jz4780-ost", "ingenic,jz4770-ost";
+			compatible = "ingenic,jz4780-ost", "ingenic,jz4760b-ost";
 			reg = <0xe0 0x20>;
 
 			clocks = <&tcu TCU_CLK_OST>;
-- 
2.33.0

Re: [PATCH 04/18] MIPS: DTS: jz4780: fix ost timer as reported by dtbscheck

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 08/04/2022 20:37, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
> arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: timer@10002000: timer@e0:compatible: 'oneOf' conditional failed, one must be fixed:
> 	['ingenic,jz4780-ost', 'ingenic,jz4770-ost'] is too long
> 	'ingenic,jz4780-ost' is not one of ['ingenic,jz4725b-ost', 'ingenic,jz4760b-ost']
> 	'ingenic,jz4760-ost' was expected
> 	'ingenic,jz4725b-ost' was expected
> 	'ingenic,jz4760b-ost' was expected
> 	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/timer/ingenic,tcu.yaml
> 
> Signed-off-by: H. Nikolaus Schaller <hns@goldelico.com>
> ---
>  arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 

The same as patch 3 - needs explanation.


Best regards,
Krzysztof

[PATCH 05/18] MIPS: DTS: jz4780: fix pinctrl as reported by dtbscheck

[H. Nikolaus Schaller]

arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: pin-controller@10010000: $nodename:0: 'pin-controller@10010000' does not match '^(pinctrl|pinmux)(@[0-9a-f]+)?$'
	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/ingenic,pinctrl.yaml

Signed-off-by: H. Nikolaus Schaller <hns@goldelico.com>
---
 arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi b/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi
index 5f44cf004d473..b5299eaffb84a 100644
--- a/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi
+++ b/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi
@@ -155,7 +155,7 @@ rtc_dev: rtc@10003000 {
 		clock-names = "rtc";
 	};
 
-	pinctrl: pin-controller@10010000 {
+	pinctrl: pinctrl@10010000 {
 		compatible = "ingenic,jz4780-pinctrl";
 		reg = <0x10010000 0x600>;
 
-- 
2.33.0

Re: [PATCH 05/18] MIPS: DTS: jz4780: fix pinctrl as reported by dtbscheck

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 08/04/2022 20:37, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
> arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: pin-controller@10010000: $nodename:0: 'pin-controller@10010000' does not match '^(pinctrl|pinmux)(@[0-9a-f]+)?$'
> 	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/ingenic,pinctrl.yaml
> 
> Signed-off-by: H. Nikolaus Schaller <hns@goldelico.com>
> ---
>  arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi b/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi
> index 5f44cf004d473..b5299eaffb84a 100644
> --- a/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi
> +++ b/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi
> @@ -155,7 +155,7 @@ rtc_dev: rtc@10003000 {
>  		clock-names = "rtc";
>  	};
>  
> -	pinctrl: pin-controller@10010000 {
> +	pinctrl: pinctrl@10010000 {

Do it once for all DTSes, not one file at a time. There are four more
places with this.

Best regards,
Krzysztof

Re: [PATCH 05/18] MIPS: DTS: jz4780: fix pinctrl as reported by dtbscheck

[H. Nikolaus Schaller]

> Am 09.04.2022 um 13:13 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>:
> 
> On 08/04/2022 20:37, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
>> arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: pin-controller@10010000: $nodename:0: 'pin-controller@10010000' does not match '^(pinctrl|pinmux)(@[0-9a-f]+)?$'
>> 	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/ingenic,pinctrl.yaml
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: H. Nikolaus Schaller <hns@goldelico.com>
>> ---
>> arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi | 2 +-
>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>> 
>> diff --git a/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi b/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi
>> index 5f44cf004d473..b5299eaffb84a 100644
>> --- a/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi
>> +++ b/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi
>> @@ -155,7 +155,7 @@ rtc_dev: rtc@10003000 {
>> 		clock-names = "rtc";
>> 	};
>> 
>> -	pinctrl: pin-controller@10010000 {
>> +	pinctrl: pinctrl@10010000 {
> 
> Do it once for all DTSes, not one file at a time. There are four more
> places with this.

Well, automation has no notion of "similarity" in this case to
merge several patches.

And they are not related. Every one is based on a different .yaml
schema file.

That in all cases the result looks similar comes from similar
requirements by the schemata and has no inherent connection.

Re: [PATCH 05/18] MIPS: DTS: jz4780: fix pinctrl as reported by dtbscheck

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 09/04/2022 15:04, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
> 
> 
>> Am 09.04.2022 um 13:13 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>:
>>
>> On 08/04/2022 20:37, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
>>> arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: pin-controller@10010000: $nodename:0: 'pin-controller@10010000' does not match '^(pinctrl|pinmux)(@[0-9a-f]+)?$'
>>> 	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/ingenic,pinctrl.yaml
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: H. Nikolaus Schaller <hns@goldelico.com>
>>> ---
>>> arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi | 2 +-
>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi b/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi
>>> index 5f44cf004d473..b5299eaffb84a 100644
>>> --- a/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi
>>> +++ b/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi
>>> @@ -155,7 +155,7 @@ rtc_dev: rtc@10003000 {
>>> 		clock-names = "rtc";
>>> 	};
>>>
>>> -	pinctrl: pin-controller@10010000 {
>>> +	pinctrl: pinctrl@10010000 {
>>
>> Do it once for all DTSes, not one file at a time. There are four more
>> places with this.
> 
> Well, automation has no notion of "similarity" in this case to
> merge several patches.

What does that mean? One cannot create multiple patches and apply them?

> And they are not related. Every one is based on a different .yaml
> schema file.

Which does not matter, because the name of the node does not matter. We
enforce it in schema to makes things organized and easier in testing.
This does not fix any real problem, just the problem we created by
ourselves with schema.

> 
> That in all cases the result looks similar comes from similar
> requirements by the schemata and has no inherent connection.

All schemas will require it, won't they? The same for arm...

Best regards,
Krzysztof

Re: [PATCH 05/18] MIPS: DTS: jz4780: fix pinctrl as reported by dtbscheck

[H. Nikolaus Schaller]

> Am 09.04.2022 um 15:13 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>:
> 
> On 09/04/2022 15:04, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>> Am 09.04.2022 um 13:13 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>:
>>> 
>>> On 08/04/2022 20:37, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
>>>> arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: pin-controller@10010000: $nodename:0: 'pin-controller@10010000' does not match '^(pinctrl|pinmux)(@[0-9a-f]+)?$'
>>>> 	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/ingenic,pinctrl.yaml
>>>> 
>>>> Signed-off-by: H. Nikolaus Schaller <hns@goldelico.com>
>>>> ---
>>>> arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi | 2 +-
>>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>> 
>>>> diff --git a/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi b/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi
>>>> index 5f44cf004d473..b5299eaffb84a 100644
>>>> --- a/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi
>>>> +++ b/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi
>>>> @@ -155,7 +155,7 @@ rtc_dev: rtc@10003000 {
>>>> 		clock-names = "rtc";
>>>> 	};
>>>> 
>>>> -	pinctrl: pin-controller@10010000 {
>>>> +	pinctrl: pinctrl@10010000 {
>>> 
>>> Do it once for all DTSes, not one file at a time. There are four more
>>> places with this.
>> 
>> Well, automation has no notion of "similarity" in this case to
>> merge several patches.
> 
> What does that mean? One cannot create multiple patches and apply them?

This patch set was created by some automatic scripts. And they produce one patch
per group of warnings.

But here you ask me to merge 4 unrelated topics into a single one.

Or do you mean something else?

> 
>> And they are not related. Every one is based on a different .yaml
>> schema file.
> 
> Which does not matter, because the name of the node does not matter. We
> enforce it in schema to makes things organized and easier in testing.
> This does not fix any real problem, just the problem we created by
> ourselves with schema.
> 
>> 
>> That in all cases the result looks similar comes from similar
>> requirements by the schemata and has no inherent connection.
> 
> All schemas will require it, won't they? The same for arm...

We may be talking about different things here.

My understanding:
you ask me to merge 5/18, 8/18, 9/18, 12/18 because they contain "controller" in the node-name.

Right? If not then we must clarify that first.

For pinctrl it is not allowed to have a -controller suffix while for the other it is mandatory
by the schema pattern.

BR and thanks,
Nikolaus

Re: [PATCH 05/18] MIPS: DTS: jz4780: fix pinctrl as reported by dtbscheck

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 09/04/2022 15:22, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
>>
>> What does that mean? One cannot create multiple patches and apply them?
> 
> This patch set was created by some automatic scripts. And they produce one patch
> per group of warnings.
> 
> But here you ask me to merge 4 unrelated topics into a single one.
> 
> Or do you mean something else?

You can edit a commit, right? git commit --amend? So where is the problem?

> 
>>
>>> And they are not related. Every one is based on a different .yaml
>>> schema file.
>>
>> Which does not matter, because the name of the node does not matter. We
>> enforce it in schema to makes things organized and easier in testing.
>> This does not fix any real problem, just the problem we created by
>> ourselves with schema.
>>
>>>
>>> That in all cases the result looks similar comes from similar
>>> requirements by the schemata and has no inherent connection.
>>
>> All schemas will require it, won't they? The same for arm...
> 
> We may be talking about different things here.
> 
> My understanding:
> you ask me to merge 5/18, 8/18, 9/18, 12/18 because they contain "controller" in the node-name.
> 
> Right? If not then we must clarify that first.

No. I ask you to fix all pin-controller cases, for entire MIPS, not just
one.

And in one month one more. And then again one more.


Best regards,
Krzysztof

Re: [PATCH 05/18] MIPS: DTS: jz4780: fix pinctrl as reported by dtbscheck

[H. Nikolaus Schaller]

> Am 09.04.2022 um 15:24 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>:
> 
> On 09/04/2022 15:22, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
>>> 
>>> What does that mean? One cannot create multiple patches and apply them?
>> 
>> This patch set was created by some automatic scripts. And they produce one patch
>> per group of warnings.
>> 
>> But here you ask me to merge 4 unrelated topics into a single one.
>> 
>> Or do you mean something else?
> 
> You can edit a commit, right? git commit --amend? So where is the problem?

It is not about capabilites...

It is about understanding why you want it and what you expect.

> 
>> 
>>> 
>>>> And they are not related. Every one is based on a different .yaml
>>>> schema file.
>>> 
>>> Which does not matter, because the name of the node does not matter. We
>>> enforce it in schema to makes things organized and easier in testing.
>>> This does not fix any real problem, just the problem we created by
>>> ourselves with schema.
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> That in all cases the result looks similar comes from similar
>>>> requirements by the schemata and has no inherent connection.
>>> 
>>> All schemas will require it, won't they? The same for arm...
>> 
>> We may be talking about different things here.
>> 
>> My understanding:
>> you ask me to merge 5/18, 8/18, 9/18, 12/18 because they contain "controller" in the node-name.
>> 
>> Right? If not then we must clarify that first.
> 
> No. I ask you to fix all pin-controller cases, for entire MIPS, not just
> one.

Oops. Nope. I am a volunteer and neither your employee nor slave.

> And in one month one more. And then again one more.

No. I work for the topics I choose to work on and share the results.
Open source lives from taking and giving...

If you want me to contribute, please be not demanding.

BR and thanks,
Nikolaus

Re: [PATCH 05/18] MIPS: DTS: jz4780: fix pinctrl as reported by dtbscheck

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 09/04/2022 15:41, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
>>
>> No. I ask you to fix all pin-controller cases, for entire MIPS, not just
>> one.
> 
> Oops. Nope. I am a volunteer and neither your employee nor slave.

No one thinks differently and I am sorry that you felt it. Please accept
my apologies, if you get different impression. You understand though the
meaning of word "ask for something" and "order something" (the latter
which I did not use).

I just asked.

Best regards,
Krzysztof

Re: [PATCH 05/18] MIPS: DTS: jz4780: fix pinctrl as reported by dtbscheck

[H. Nikolaus Schaller]

> Am 09.04.2022 um 15:46 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>:
> 
> On 09/04/2022 15:41, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
>>> 
>>> No. I ask you to fix all pin-controller cases, for entire MIPS, not just
>>> one.
>> 
>> Oops. Nope. I am a volunteer and neither your employee nor slave.
> 
> No one thinks differently and I am sorry that you felt it. Please accept
> my apologies, if you get different impression. You understand though the
> meaning of word "ask for something" and "order something" (the latter
> which I did not use).
> 
> I just asked.

Ok. Maybe english is not our mother language and we sometimes don't
get the nuances right. Sorry if I understood that wrongly.

At least I now understand what you did suggest.

Doing the same change for treewide MIPS is beyond my capabilities since
I can't easily test any compile setup. So far I only compile for CI20 and
as far as I know every machine still needs its own config for MIPS 
(haven't checked recently). So I am not even sure if dtbscheck tells me
all locations.

BR and thanks,
Nikolaus

Re: [PATCH 05/18] MIPS: DTS: jz4780: fix pinctrl as reported by dtbscheck

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 09/04/2022 15:57, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
> 
> 
>> Am 09.04.2022 um 15:46 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>:
>>
>> On 09/04/2022 15:41, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
>>>>
>>>> No. I ask you to fix all pin-controller cases, for entire MIPS, not just
>>>> one.
>>>
>>> Oops. Nope. I am a volunteer and neither your employee nor slave.
>>
>> No one thinks differently and I am sorry that you felt it. Please accept
>> my apologies, if you get different impression. You understand though the
>> meaning of word "ask for something" and "order something" (the latter
>> which I did not use).
>>
>> I just asked.
> 
> Ok. Maybe english is not our mother language and we sometimes don't
> get the nuances right. Sorry if I understood that wrongly.
> 
> At least I now understand what you did suggest.

Yeah, probably I did not express my thoughts correctly.

I would like to state that I appreciate your work and I think it is
important, even if I do not express it correctly. Please accept my
apologies if I am bit harsh or impolite. That's not my intention.

> 
> Doing the same change for treewide MIPS is beyond my capabilities since
> I can't easily test any compile setup. So far I only compile for CI20 and
> as far as I know every machine still needs its own config for MIPS 
> (haven't checked recently). So I am not even sure if dtbscheck tells me
> all locations.


OK, fair enough.


Best regards,
Krzysztof

Re: [PATCH 05/18] MIPS: DTS: jz4780: fix pinctrl as reported by dtbscheck

[H. Nikolaus Schaller]

> Am 09.04.2022 um 16:00 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>:
> 
> On 09/04/2022 15:57, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>> Am 09.04.2022 um 15:46 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>:
>>> 
>>> On 09/04/2022 15:41, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> No. I ask you to fix all pin-controller cases, for entire MIPS, not just
>>>>> one.
>>>> 
>>>> Oops. Nope. I am a volunteer and neither your employee nor slave.
>>> 
>>> No one thinks differently and I am sorry that you felt it. Please accept
>>> my apologies, if you get different impression. You understand though the
>>> meaning of word "ask for something" and "order something" (the latter
>>> which I did not use).
>>> 
>>> I just asked.
>> 
>> Ok. Maybe english is not our mother language and we sometimes don't
>> get the nuances right. Sorry if I understood that wrongly.
>> 
>> At least I now understand what you did suggest.
> 
> Yeah, probably I did not express my thoughts correctly.
> 
> I would like to state that I appreciate your work and I think it is
> important, even if I do not express it correctly. Please accept my
> apologies if I am bit harsh or impolite. That's not my intention.

I also was a little harsh in my response. Sorry again.

> 
>> 
>> Doing the same change for treewide MIPS is beyond my capabilities since
>> I can't easily test any compile setup. So far I only compile for CI20 and
>> as far as I know every machine still needs its own config for MIPS 
>> (haven't checked recently). So I am not even sure if dtbscheck tells me
>> all locations.
> 
> 
> OK, fair enough.
> 
> 
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof

Anyways thank you very much for your reviews and sharing comments.

As far as I see there are only the jz4780-nemc/simple-mfd and the snps,dwc2/jz4780-otg
issues really unsolved while the others are more cosmetics.

Let's see how these settle.

BR and thanks,
Nikolaus

[PATCH 06/18] MIPS: DTS: jz4780: fix rtc node as reported by dtbscheck

[H. Nikolaus Schaller]

arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: rtc@10003000: compatible: 'oneOf' conditional failed, one must be fixed:
	['ingenic,jz4780-rtc'] is too short
	'ingenic,jz4780-rtc' is not one of ['ingenic,jz4740-rtc', 'ingenic,jz4760-rtc']
	'ingenic,jz4725b-rtc' was expected
	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/ingenic,rtc.yaml

Signed-off-by: H. Nikolaus Schaller <hns@goldelico.com>
---
 arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi | 3 ++-
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi b/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi
index b5299eaffb84a..2021836983c96 100644
--- a/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi
+++ b/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi
@@ -145,7 +145,8 @@ ost: timer@e0 {
 	};
 
 	rtc_dev: rtc@10003000 {
-		compatible = "ingenic,jz4780-rtc";
+		compatible = "ingenic,jz4780-rtc",
+			     "ingenic,jz4760-rtc";
 		reg = <0x10003000 0x4c>;
 
 		interrupt-parent = <&intc>;
-- 
2.33.0

Re: [PATCH 06/18] MIPS: DTS: jz4780: fix rtc node as reported by dtbscheck

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 08/04/2022 20:37, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
> arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: rtc@10003000: compatible: 'oneOf' conditional failed, one must be fixed:
> 	['ingenic,jz4780-rtc'] is too short
> 	'ingenic,jz4780-rtc' is not one of ['ingenic,jz4740-rtc', 'ingenic,jz4760-rtc']
> 	'ingenic,jz4725b-rtc' was expected
> 	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/ingenic,rtc.yaml

Why? Maybe the schema is wrong. These devices might not be compatible.

Best regards,
Krzysztof

Re: [PATCH 06/18] MIPS: DTS: jz4780: fix rtc node as reported by dtbscheck

[H. Nikolaus Schaller]

> Am 09.04.2022 um 13:14 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>:
> 
> On 08/04/2022 20:37, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
>> arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: rtc@10003000: compatible: 'oneOf' conditional failed, one must be fixed:
>> 	['ingenic,jz4780-rtc'] is too short
>> 	'ingenic,jz4780-rtc' is not one of ['ingenic,jz4740-rtc', 'ingenic,jz4760-rtc']
>> 	'ingenic,jz4725b-rtc' was expected
>> 	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/ingenic,rtc.yaml
> 
> Why? Maybe the schema is wrong. These devices might not be compatible.

Here you may be right that the .yaml is wrong. Paul?

[PATCH 07/18] MIPS: DTS: jz4780: fix otg node as reported by dtbscheck

[H. Nikolaus Schaller]

arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: usb@13500000: compatible: 'oneOf' conditional failed, one must be fixed:
	['ingenic,jz4780-otg', 'snps,dwc2'] is too long
	['ingenic,jz4780-otg', 'snps,dwc2'] is too short
	'brcm,bcm2835-usb' was expected
	'hisilicon,hi6220-usb' was expected
	'rockchip,rk3066-usb' was expected
	'ingenic,jz4780-otg' is not one of ['rockchip,px30-usb', 'rockchip,rk3036-usb', 'rockchip,rk3188-usb', 'rockchip,rk3228-usb', 'rockchip,rk3288-usb', 'rockchip,rk3308-usb', 'rockchip,rk3328-usb', 'rockchip,rk3368-usb', 'rockchip,rv1108-usb']
	'lantiq,arx100-usb' was expected
	'lantiq,xrx200-usb' was expected
	'ingenic,jz4780-otg' is not one of ['amlogic,meson8-usb', 'amlogic,meson8b-usb', 'amlogic,meson-gxbb-usb', 'amlogic,meson-g12a-usb', 'intel,socfpga-agilex-hsotg']
	'amcc,dwc-otg' was expected
	'apm,apm82181-dwc-otg' was expected
	'snps,dwc2' was expected
	'st,stm32f4x9-fsotg' was expected
	'st,stm32f4x9-hsotg' was expected
	'st,stm32f7-hsotg' was expected
	'st,stm32mp15-fsotg' was expected
	'st,stm32mp15-hsotg' was expected
	'samsung,s3c6400-hsotg' was expected
	'intel,socfpga-agilex-hsotg' was expected
	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/dwc2.yaml

Signed-off-by: H. Nikolaus Schaller <hns@goldelico.com>
---
 arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi b/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi
index 2021836983c96..c5124459678b7 100644
--- a/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi
+++ b/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi
@@ -576,7 +576,7 @@ bch: bch@134d0000 {
 	};
 
 	otg: usb@13500000 {
-		compatible = "ingenic,jz4780-otg", "snps,dwc2";
+		compatible = "snps,dwc2";
 		reg = <0x13500000 0x40000>;
 
 		interrupt-parent = <&intc>;
-- 
2.33.0

Re: [PATCH 07/18] MIPS: DTS: jz4780: fix otg node as reported by dtbscheck

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 08/04/2022 20:37, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
> arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: usb@13500000: compatible: 'oneOf' conditional failed, one must be fixed:
> 	['ingenic,jz4780-otg', 'snps,dwc2'] is too long
> 	['ingenic,jz4780-otg', 'snps,dwc2'] is too short
> 	'brcm,bcm2835-usb' was expected
> 	'hisilicon,hi6220-usb' was expected
> 	'rockchip,rk3066-usb' was expected
> 	'ingenic,jz4780-otg' is not one of ['rockchip,px30-usb', 'rockchip,rk3036-usb', 'rockchip,rk3188-usb', 'rockchip,rk3228-usb', 'rockchip,rk3288-usb', 'rockchip,rk3308-usb', 'rockchip,rk3328-usb', 'rockchip,rk3368-usb', 'rockchip,rv1108-usb']
> 	'lantiq,arx100-usb' was expected
> 	'lantiq,xrx200-usb' was expected
> 	'ingenic,jz4780-otg' is not one of ['amlogic,meson8-usb', 'amlogic,meson8b-usb', 'amlogic,meson-gxbb-usb', 'amlogic,meson-g12a-usb', 'intel,socfpga-agilex-hsotg']
> 	'amcc,dwc-otg' was expected
> 	'apm,apm82181-dwc-otg' was expected
> 	'snps,dwc2' was expected
> 	'st,stm32f4x9-fsotg' was expected
> 	'st,stm32f4x9-hsotg' was expected
> 	'st,stm32f7-hsotg' was expected
> 	'st,stm32mp15-fsotg' was expected
> 	'st,stm32mp15-hsotg' was expected
> 	'samsung,s3c6400-hsotg' was expected
> 	'intel,socfpga-agilex-hsotg' was expected

You really don't need to paste entire warning.


> 	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/dwc2.yaml
> 
> Signed-off-by: H. Nikolaus Schaller <hns@goldelico.com>
> ---
>  arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi b/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi
> index 2021836983c96..c5124459678b7 100644
> --- a/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi
> +++ b/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi
> @@ -576,7 +576,7 @@ bch: bch@134d0000 {
>  	};
>  
>  	otg: usb@13500000 {
> -		compatible = "ingenic,jz4780-otg", "snps,dwc2";
> +		compatible = "snps,dwc2";

This looks wrong, the block usually should have a specific compatible.
Please mention why it does not.

Best regards,
Best regards,
Krzysztof

Re: [PATCH 07/18] MIPS: DTS: jz4780: fix otg node as reported by dtbscheck

[Paul Cercueil]

Hi,

Le sam., avril 9 2022 at 13:15:37 +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski 
<krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> a écrit :
> On 08/04/2022 20:37, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
>>  arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: usb@13500000: compatible: 
>> 'oneOf' conditional failed, one must be fixed:
>>  	['ingenic,jz4780-otg', 'snps,dwc2'] is too long
>>  	['ingenic,jz4780-otg', 'snps,dwc2'] is too short
>>  	'brcm,bcm2835-usb' was expected
>>  	'hisilicon,hi6220-usb' was expected
>>  	'rockchip,rk3066-usb' was expected
>>  	'ingenic,jz4780-otg' is not one of ['rockchip,px30-usb', 
>> 'rockchip,rk3036-usb', 'rockchip,rk3188-usb', 'rockchip,rk3228-usb', 
>> 'rockchip,rk3288-usb', 'rockchip,rk3308-usb', 'rockchip,rk3328-usb', 
>> 'rockchip,rk3368-usb', 'rockchip,rv1108-usb']
>>  	'lantiq,arx100-usb' was expected
>>  	'lantiq,xrx200-usb' was expected
>>  	'ingenic,jz4780-otg' is not one of ['amlogic,meson8-usb', 
>> 'amlogic,meson8b-usb', 'amlogic,meson-gxbb-usb', 
>> 'amlogic,meson-g12a-usb', 'intel,socfpga-agilex-hsotg']
>>  	'amcc,dwc-otg' was expected
>>  	'apm,apm82181-dwc-otg' was expected
>>  	'snps,dwc2' was expected
>>  	'st,stm32f4x9-fsotg' was expected
>>  	'st,stm32f4x9-hsotg' was expected
>>  	'st,stm32f7-hsotg' was expected
>>  	'st,stm32mp15-fsotg' was expected
>>  	'st,stm32mp15-hsotg' was expected
>>  	'samsung,s3c6400-hsotg' was expected
>>  	'intel,socfpga-agilex-hsotg' was expected
> 
> You really don't need to paste entire warning.
> 
> 
>>  	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/dwc2.yaml
>> 
>>  Signed-off-by: H. Nikolaus Schaller <hns@goldelico.com>
>>  ---
>>   arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi | 2 +-
>>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>> 
>>  diff --git a/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi 
>> b/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi
>>  index 2021836983c96..c5124459678b7 100644
>>  --- a/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi
>>  +++ b/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi
>>  @@ -576,7 +576,7 @@ bch: bch@134d0000 {
>>   	};
>> 
>>   	otg: usb@13500000 {
>>  -		compatible = "ingenic,jz4780-otg", "snps,dwc2";
>>  +		compatible = "snps,dwc2";
> 
> This looks wrong, the block usually should have a specific compatible.
> Please mention why it does not.

Agreed. The "snps,dwc2" should be a fallback string, otherwise there is 
no way to uniquely identify the JZ4780 implementation of the IP.

Cheers,
-Paul

Re: [PATCH 07/18] MIPS: DTS: jz4780: fix otg node as reported by dtbscheck

[H. Nikolaus Schaller]

Hi,

> Am 09.04.2022 um 14:27 schrieb Paul Cercueil <paul@crapouillou.net>:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Le sam., avril 9 2022 at 13:15:37 +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> a écrit :
>> On 08/04/2022 20:37, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
>>> arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: usb@13500000: compatible: 'oneOf' conditional failed, one must be fixed:
>>> 	['ingenic,jz4780-otg', 'snps,dwc2'] is too long
>>> 	['ingenic,jz4780-otg', 'snps,dwc2'] is too short
>>> 	'brcm,bcm2835-usb' was expected
>>> 	'hisilicon,hi6220-usb' was expected
>>> 	'rockchip,rk3066-usb' was expected
>>> 	'ingenic,jz4780-otg' is not one of ['rockchip,px30-usb', 'rockchip,rk3036-usb', 'rockchip,rk3188-usb', 'rockchip,rk3228-usb', 'rockchip,rk3288-usb', 'rockchip,rk3308-usb', 'rockchip,rk3328-usb', 'rockchip,rk3368-usb', 'rockchip,rv1108-usb']
>>> 	'lantiq,arx100-usb' was expected
>>> 	'lantiq,xrx200-usb' was expected
>>> 	'ingenic,jz4780-otg' is not one of ['amlogic,meson8-usb', 'amlogic,meson8b-usb', 'amlogic,meson-gxbb-usb', 'amlogic,meson-g12a-usb', 'intel,socfpga-agilex-hsotg']
>>> 	'amcc,dwc-otg' was expected
>>> 	'apm,apm82181-dwc-otg' was expected
>>> 	'snps,dwc2' was expected
>>> 	'st,stm32f4x9-fsotg' was expected
>>> 	'st,stm32f4x9-hsotg' was expected
>>> 	'st,stm32f7-hsotg' was expected
>>> 	'st,stm32mp15-fsotg' was expected
>>> 	'st,stm32mp15-hsotg' was expected
>>> 	'samsung,s3c6400-hsotg' was expected
>>> 	'intel,socfpga-agilex-hsotg' was expected
>> You really don't need to paste entire warning.
>>> 	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/dwc2.yaml
>>> Signed-off-by: H. Nikolaus Schaller <hns@goldelico.com>
>>> ---
>>>  arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi | 2 +-
>>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>> diff --git a/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi b/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi
>>> index 2021836983c96..c5124459678b7 100644
>>> --- a/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi
>>> +++ b/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi
>>> @@ -576,7 +576,7 @@ bch: bch@134d0000 {
>>>  	};
>>>  	otg: usb@13500000 {
>>> -		compatible = "ingenic,jz4780-otg", "snps,dwc2";
>>> +		compatible = "snps,dwc2";
>> This looks wrong, the block usually should have a specific compatible.
>> Please mention why it does not.
> 
> Agreed. The "snps,dwc2" should be a fallback string, otherwise there is no way to uniquely identify the JZ4780 implementation of the IP.

Well, there is no specifc implementation and driver for it. So no need to uniquely identify it.

BR and thanks,
Nikolaus

Re: [PATCH 07/18] MIPS: DTS: jz4780: fix otg node as reported by dtbscheck

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 09/04/2022 15:18, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
hould have a specific compatible.
>>> Please mention why it does not.
>>
>> Agreed. The "snps,dwc2" should be a fallback string, otherwise there is no way to uniquely identify the JZ4780 implementation of the IP.
> 
> Well, there is no specifc implementation and driver for it. So no need to uniquely identify it.

Specific implementation and driver are not arguments here. This does not
matter. It's really unrelated argument.

Bindings are not about implementation in Linux. Implementation can
change, so bindings should also?


Best regards,
Krzysztof

Re: [PATCH 07/18] MIPS: DTS: jz4780: fix otg node as reported by dtbscheck

[H. Nikolaus Schaller]

> Am 09.04.2022 um 15:23 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>:
> 
> On 09/04/2022 15:18, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
> hould have a specific compatible.
>>>> Please mention why it does not.
>>> 
>>> Agreed. The "snps,dwc2" should be a fallback string, otherwise there is no way to uniquely identify the JZ4780 implementation of the IP.
>> 
>> Well, there is no specifc implementation and driver for it. So no need to uniquely identify it.
> 
> Specific implementation and driver are not arguments here. This does not
> matter. It's really unrelated argument.

The argumentation is in reverse: if there is no need for a specialized driver or implementation,
why is there is a need to define a specialization.

Your argument was:
"there is no way to uniquely identify the JZ4780 implementation of the IP"

My question is:
"what do we need that for?"

> Bindings are not about implementation in Linux. Implementation can
> change, so bindings should also?

No. Implementations should be agnostic.

Re: [PATCH 07/18] MIPS: DTS: jz4780: fix otg node as reported by dtbscheck

[Paul Cercueil]

Le sam., avril 9 2022 at 15:37:51 +0200, H. Nikolaus Schaller 
<hns@goldelico.com> a écrit :
> 
> 
>>  Am 09.04.2022 um 15:23 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski 
>> <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>:
>> 
>>  On 09/04/2022 15:18, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
>>  hould have a specific compatible.
>>>>>  Please mention why it does not.
>>>> 
>>>>  Agreed. The "snps,dwc2" should be a fallback string, otherwise 
>>>> there is no way to uniquely identify the JZ4780 implementation of 
>>>> the IP.
>>> 
>>>  Well, there is no specifc implementation and driver for it. So no 
>>> need to uniquely identify it.
>> 
>>  Specific implementation and driver are not arguments here. This 
>> does not
>>  matter. It's really unrelated argument.
> 
> The argumentation is in reverse: if there is no need for a 
> specialized driver or implementation,
> why is there is a need to define a specialization.
> 
> Your argument was:
> "there is no way to uniquely identify the JZ4780 implementation of 
> the IP"
> 
> My question is:
> "what do we need that for?"

You may not need the differenciation now, but if you need it in the 
future and you had only the "snps,dwc2" compatible previously, then 
you're screwed, since your driver must support older device tree blobs.

-Paul

>>  Bindings are not about implementation in Linux. Implementation can
>>  change, so bindings should also?
> 
> No. Implementations should be agnostic.
> 

Re: [PATCH 07/18] MIPS: DTS: jz4780: fix otg node as reported by dtbscheck

[H. Nikolaus Schaller]

> Am 09.04.2022 um 13:15 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>:
> 
> On 08/04/2022 20:37, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
>> arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: usb@13500000: compatible: 'oneOf' conditional failed, one must be fixed:
>> 	['ingenic,jz4780-otg', 'snps,dwc2'] is too long
>> 	['ingenic,jz4780-otg', 'snps,dwc2'] is too short
>> 	'brcm,bcm2835-usb' was expected
>> 	'hisilicon,hi6220-usb' was expected
>> 	'rockchip,rk3066-usb' was expected
>> 	'ingenic,jz4780-otg' is not one of ['rockchip,px30-usb', 'rockchip,rk3036-usb', 'rockchip,rk3188-usb', 'rockchip,rk3228-usb', 'rockchip,rk3288-usb', 'rockchip,rk3308-usb', 'rockchip,rk3328-usb', 'rockchip,rk3368-usb', 'rockchip,rv1108-usb']
>> 	'lantiq,arx100-usb' was expected
>> 	'lantiq,xrx200-usb' was expected
>> 	'ingenic,jz4780-otg' is not one of ['amlogic,meson8-usb', 'amlogic,meson8b-usb', 'amlogic,meson-gxbb-usb', 'amlogic,meson-g12a-usb', 'intel,socfpga-agilex-hsotg']
>> 	'amcc,dwc-otg' was expected
>> 	'apm,apm82181-dwc-otg' was expected
>> 	'snps,dwc2' was expected
>> 	'st,stm32f4x9-fsotg' was expected
>> 	'st,stm32f4x9-hsotg' was expected
>> 	'st,stm32f7-hsotg' was expected
>> 	'st,stm32mp15-fsotg' was expected
>> 	'st,stm32mp15-hsotg' was expected
>> 	'samsung,s3c6400-hsotg' was expected
>> 	'intel,socfpga-agilex-hsotg' was expected
> 
> You really don't need to paste entire warning.
> 
> 
>> 	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/dwc2.yaml
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: H. Nikolaus Schaller <hns@goldelico.com>
>> ---
>> arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi | 2 +-
>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>> 
>> diff --git a/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi b/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi
>> index 2021836983c96..c5124459678b7 100644
>> --- a/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi
>> +++ b/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi
>> @@ -576,7 +576,7 @@ bch: bch@134d0000 {
>> 	};
>> 
>> 	otg: usb@13500000 {
>> -		compatible = "ingenic,jz4780-otg", "snps,dwc2";
>> +		compatible = "snps,dwc2";
> 
> This looks wrong, the block usually should have a specific compatible.
> Please mention why it does not.

Well, I did not even have that idea that it could need an explanation.

There is no "ingenic,jz4780-otg" and none is needed here to make it work.

Therefore the generic "snps,dwc2" is sufficient.

Re: [PATCH 07/18] MIPS: DTS: jz4780: fix otg node as reported by dtbscheck

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 09/04/2022 15:05, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
>>
>> This looks wrong, the block usually should have a specific compatible.
>> Please mention why it does not.
> 
> Well, I did not even have that idea that it could need an explanation.
> 
> There is no "ingenic,jz4780-otg" and none is needed here to make it work.

Make it work in what terms? We talk about hardware description, right?

> 
> Therefore the generic "snps,dwc2" is sufficient.

No, you are mixing now driver behavior (is sufficient) with hardware
description. Most of licensed blocks require the specific compatible to
differentiate it.


Best regards,
Krzysztof

Re: [PATCH 07/18] MIPS: DTS: jz4780: fix otg node as reported by dtbscheck

[H. Nikolaus Schaller]

> Am 09.04.2022 um 15:15 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>:
> 
> On 09/04/2022 15:05, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
>>> 
>>> This looks wrong, the block usually should have a specific compatible.
>>> Please mention why it does not.
>> 
>> Well, I did not even have that idea that it could need an explanation.
>> 
>> There is no "ingenic,jz4780-otg" and none is needed here to make it work.
> 
> Make it work in what terms? We talk about hardware description, right?

Yes.

> 
>> 
>> Therefore the generic "snps,dwc2" is sufficient.
> 
> No, you are mixing now driver behavior (is sufficient) with hardware
> description.

No. "snps,dwc2" is a hardware description for a licensed block.
Not a driver behavior.

> Most of licensed blocks require the specific compatible to
> differentiate it.

If there is a need to differentiate.

Re: [PATCH 07/18] MIPS: DTS: jz4780: fix otg node as reported by dtbscheck

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 09/04/2022 15:32, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
> 
> 
>> Am 09.04.2022 um 15:15 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>:
>>
>> On 09/04/2022 15:05, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
>>>>
>>>> This looks wrong, the block usually should have a specific compatible.
>>>> Please mention why it does not.
>>>
>>> Well, I did not even have that idea that it could need an explanation.
>>>
>>> There is no "ingenic,jz4780-otg" and none is needed here to make it work.
>>
>> Make it work in what terms? We talk about hardware description, right?
> 
> Yes.
> 
>>
>>>
>>> Therefore the generic "snps,dwc2" is sufficient.
>>
>> No, you are mixing now driver behavior (is sufficient) with hardware
>> description.
> 
> No. "snps,dwc2" is a hardware description for a licensed block.
> Not a driver behavior.

snps,dwc2 matches the original block, not necessarily this
implementation. Unless you are sure?

> 
>> Most of licensed blocks require the specific compatible to
>> differentiate it.
> 
> If there is a need to differentiate.

No, regardless whether there is a need currently, most of them have
specific compatibles, because there are some minor differences. Even if
difference is not visible from programming model or wiring, it might
justify it's own specific compatible. For example because maybe once
that tiny difference will require some changes.

Someone added the ingenic compatible, so why do you assume that one tool
(bindings) is correct but other piece of code (using specific
compatible) is not? You use the argument "bindings warning" which is not
enough. Argument that blocks are 100% same, is good enough, if you are
sure. Just use it in commit msg. But are you sure that these are the
same? Same pins, same programming model (entire model, not used by Linux)?

Best regards,
Krzysztof

Re: [PATCH 07/18] MIPS: DTS: jz4780: fix otg node as reported by dtbscheck

[H. Nikolaus Schaller]

> Am 09.04.2022 um 15:44 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>:
> 
> On 09/04/2022 15:32, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>> Am 09.04.2022 um 15:15 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>:
>>> 
>>> On 09/04/2022 15:05, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> This looks wrong, the block usually should have a specific compatible.
>>>>> Please mention why it does not.
>>>> 
>>>> Well, I did not even have that idea that it could need an explanation.
>>>> 
>>>> There is no "ingenic,jz4780-otg" and none is needed here to make it work.
>>> 
>>> Make it work in what terms? We talk about hardware description, right?
>> 
>> Yes.
>> 
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Therefore the generic "snps,dwc2" is sufficient.
>>> 
>>> No, you are mixing now driver behavior (is sufficient) with hardware
>>> description.
>> 
>> No. "snps,dwc2" is a hardware description for a licensed block.
>> Not a driver behavior.
> 
> snps,dwc2 matches the original block, not necessarily this
> implementation. Unless you are sure?

I assume. Nobody has reported an issue without having any specific jz4780 driver in place.
Well, that is only evidence, not bullet proof.

> 
>> 
>>> Most of licensed blocks require the specific compatible to
>>> differentiate it.
>> 
>> If there is a need to differentiate.
> 
> No, regardless whether there is a need currently, most of them have
> specific compatibles, because there are some minor differences. Even if
> difference is not visible from programming model or wiring, it might
> justify it's own specific compatible. For example because maybe once
> that tiny difference will require some changes.
> 
> Someone added the ingenic compatible, so why do you assume that one tool
> (bindings) is correct but other piece of code (using specific
> compatible) is not? You use the argument "bindings warning" which is not
> enough. Argument that blocks are 100% same, is good enough, if you are
> sure. Just use it in commit msg. But are you sure that these are the
> same? Same pins, same programming model (entire model, not used by Linux)?

The compatible ingenic,jz4780-otg was introduced in 158c774d3c64859e84dd20e04d5fb18c8d3d318e.
Hence I have added Yanjie for clarification why he added it in the .dts and not in the bindings.

BR and thanks,
Nikolaus

Re: [PATCH 07/18] MIPS: DTS: jz4780: fix otg node as reported by dtbscheck

[Zhou Yanjie]

Hi folks,

On 2022/4/9 下午9:53, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
>
>> Am 09.04.2022 um 15:44 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>:
>>
>> On 09/04/2022 15:32, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
>>>
>>>> Am 09.04.2022 um 15:15 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>:
>>>>
>>>> On 09/04/2022 15:05, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
>>>>>> This looks wrong, the block usually should have a specific compatible.
>>>>>> Please mention why it does not.
>>>>> Well, I did not even have that idea that it could need an explanation.
>>>>>
>>>>> There is no "ingenic,jz4780-otg" and none is needed here to make it work.
>>>> Make it work in what terms? We talk about hardware description, right?
>>> Yes.
>>>
>>>>> Therefore the generic "snps,dwc2" is sufficient.
>>>> No, you are mixing now driver behavior (is sufficient) with hardware
>>>> description.
>>> No. "snps,dwc2" is a hardware description for a licensed block.
>>> Not a driver behavior.
>> snps,dwc2 matches the original block, not necessarily this
>> implementation. Unless you are sure?
> I assume. Nobody has reported an issue without having any specific jz4780 driver in place.
> Well, that is only evidence, not bullet proof.
>
>>>> Most of licensed blocks require the specific compatible to
>>>> differentiate it.
>>> If there is a need to differentiate.
>> No, regardless whether there is a need currently, most of them have
>> specific compatibles, because there are some minor differences. Even if
>> difference is not visible from programming model or wiring, it might
>> justify it's own specific compatible. For example because maybe once
>> that tiny difference will require some changes.
>>
>> Someone added the ingenic compatible, so why do you assume that one tool
>> (bindings) is correct but other piece of code (using specific
>> compatible) is not? You use the argument "bindings warning" which is not
>> enough. Argument that blocks are 100% same, is good enough, if you are
>> sure. Just use it in commit msg. But are you sure that these are the
>> same? Same pins, same programming model (entire model, not used by Linux)?
> The compatible ingenic,jz4780-otg was introduced in 158c774d3c64859e84dd20e04d5fb18c8d3d318e.
> Hence I have added Yanjie for clarification why he added it in the .dts and not in the bindings.


It's my fault, last year I made an OTG driver for Ingenic SoCs and sent it
to the mailing list, and then I received some revision comments, but for
some personal reasons I didn't continue to improve it.

I'll finish these modifications as soon as possible and send them out.
Then after they merge into the mainline, this problem will be solved.


Thanks and best regards!


>
> BR and thanks,
> Nikolaus
>

Re: [PATCH 07/18] MIPS: DTS: jz4780: fix otg node as reported by dtbscheck

[H. Nikolaus Schaller]

Hi,

> Am 10.04.2022 um 18:32 schrieb Zhou Yanjie <zhouyanjie@wanyeetech.com>:
> 
> Hi folks,
> 
> On 2022/4/9 下午9:53, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
>> 
>>> Am 09.04.2022 um 15:44 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>:
>>> 
>>> On 09/04/2022 15:32, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Am 09.04.2022 um 15:15 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>:
>>>>> 
>>>>> On 09/04/2022 15:05, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
>>>>>>> This looks wrong, the block usually should have a specific compatible.
>>>>>>> Please mention why it does not.
>>>>>> Well, I did not even have that idea that it could need an explanation.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> There is no "ingenic,jz4780-otg" and none is needed here to make it work.
>>>>> Make it work in what terms? We talk about hardware description, right?
>>>> Yes.
>>>> 
>>>>>> Therefore the generic "snps,dwc2" is sufficient.
>>>>> No, you are mixing now driver behavior (is sufficient) with hardware
>>>>> description.
>>>> No. "snps,dwc2" is a hardware description for a licensed block.
>>>> Not a driver behavior.
>>> snps,dwc2 matches the original block, not necessarily this
>>> implementation. Unless you are sure?
>> I assume. Nobody has reported an issue without having any specific jz4780 driver in place.
>> Well, that is only evidence, not bullet proof.
>> 
>>>>> Most of licensed blocks require the specific compatible to
>>>>> differentiate it.
>>>> If there is a need to differentiate.
>>> No, regardless whether there is a need currently, most of them have
>>> specific compatibles, because there are some minor differences. Even if
>>> difference is not visible from programming model or wiring, it might
>>> justify it's own specific compatible. For example because maybe once
>>> that tiny difference will require some changes.
>>> 
>>> Someone added the ingenic compatible, so why do you assume that one tool
>>> (bindings) is correct but other piece of code (using specific
>>> compatible) is not? You use the argument "bindings warning" which is not
>>> enough. Argument that blocks are 100% same, is good enough, if you are
>>> sure. Just use it in commit msg. But are you sure that these are the
>>> same? Same pins, same programming model (entire model, not used by Linux)?
>> The compatible ingenic,jz4780-otg was introduced in 158c774d3c64859e84dd20e04d5fb18c8d3d318e.
>> Hence I have added Yanjie for clarification why he added it in the .dts and not in the bindings.
> 
> 
> It's my fault, last year I made an OTG driver for Ingenic SoCs and sent it
> to the mailing list, and then I received some revision comments, but for
> some personal reasons I didn't continue to improve it.
> 
> I'll finish these modifications as soon as possible and send them out.
> Then after they merge into the mainline, this problem will be solved.

No need to apologize.

If you agree I can add "ingenic,jz4780-otg" to the schema file and keep
the .dts in the v2 of my series.

And I'll add you to the list of reviewers, so you can please comment v2
if it is correct or if we are still missing something.

Best regards and thanks,
Nikolaus

Re: [PATCH 07/18] MIPS: DTS: jz4780: fix otg node as reported by dtbscheck

[Zhou Yanjie]

Hi Nikolaus,

On 2022/4/11 上午3:13, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
> Hi,
>
>> Am 10.04.2022 um 18:32 schrieb Zhou Yanjie <zhouyanjie@wanyeetech.com>:
>>
>> Hi folks,
>>
>> On 2022/4/9 下午9:53, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
>>>> Am 09.04.2022 um 15:44 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>:
>>>>
>>>> On 09/04/2022 15:32, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
>>>>>> Am 09.04.2022 um 15:15 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 09/04/2022 15:05, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
>>>>>>>> This looks wrong, the block usually should have a specific compatible.
>>>>>>>> Please mention why it does not.
>>>>>>> Well, I did not even have that idea that it could need an explanation.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There is no "ingenic,jz4780-otg" and none is needed here to make it work.
>>>>>> Make it work in what terms? We talk about hardware description, right?
>>>>> Yes.
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Therefore the generic "snps,dwc2" is sufficient.
>>>>>> No, you are mixing now driver behavior (is sufficient) with hardware
>>>>>> description.
>>>>> No. "snps,dwc2" is a hardware description for a licensed block.
>>>>> Not a driver behavior.
>>>> snps,dwc2 matches the original block, not necessarily this
>>>> implementation. Unless you are sure?
>>> I assume. Nobody has reported an issue without having any specific jz4780 driver in place.
>>> Well, that is only evidence, not bullet proof.
>>>
>>>>>> Most of licensed blocks require the specific compatible to
>>>>>> differentiate it.
>>>>> If there is a need to differentiate.
>>>> No, regardless whether there is a need currently, most of them have
>>>> specific compatibles, because there are some minor differences. Even if
>>>> difference is not visible from programming model or wiring, it might
>>>> justify it's own specific compatible. For example because maybe once
>>>> that tiny difference will require some changes.
>>>>
>>>> Someone added the ingenic compatible, so why do you assume that one tool
>>>> (bindings) is correct but other piece of code (using specific
>>>> compatible) is not? You use the argument "bindings warning" which is not
>>>> enough. Argument that blocks are 100% same, is good enough, if you are
>>>> sure. Just use it in commit msg. But are you sure that these are the
>>>> same? Same pins, same programming model (entire model, not used by Linux)?
>>> The compatible ingenic,jz4780-otg was introduced in 158c774d3c64859e84dd20e04d5fb18c8d3d318e.
>>> Hence I have added Yanjie for clarification why he added it in the .dts and not in the bindings.
>>
>> It's my fault, last year I made an OTG driver for Ingenic SoCs and sent it
>> to the mailing list, and then I received some revision comments, but for
>> some personal reasons I didn't continue to improve it.
>>
>> I'll finish these modifications as soon as possible and send them out.
>> Then after they merge into the mainline, this problem will be solved.
> No need to apologize.
>
> If you agree I can add "ingenic,jz4780-otg" to the schema file and keep
> the .dts in the v2 of my series.


Sure.

Or you can wait a bit, I plan to send out new patches later today, it 
contains "ingenic,jz4780-otg".


> And I'll add you to the list of reviewers, so you can please comment v2
> if it is correct or if we are still missing something.


Okay, thanks!


>
> Best regards and thanks,
> Nikolaus

Re: [PATCH 07/18] MIPS: DTS: jz4780: fix otg node as reported by dtbscheck

[H. Nikolaus Schaller]

Hi Yanjie,

> Am 12.04.2022 um 11:49 schrieb Zhou Yanjie <zhouyanjie@wanyeetech.com>:
> 
> Hi Nikolaus,
> 
> On 2022/4/11 上午3:13, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
>> Hi,
>> 
>> 
>> If you agree I can add "ingenic,jz4780-otg" to the schema file and keep
>> the .dts in the v2 of my series.
> 
> 
> Sure.
> 
> Or you can wait a bit, I plan to send out new patches later today, it contains "ingenic,jz4780-otg".

Would be fine! I think you will be faster than me :)

So I'll check with your patch and drop mine from my v2 series.

BR and thanks,
Nikolaus

[PATCH 08/18] MIPS: DTS: jz4780: fix lcd controllers as reported by dtbscheck

[H. Nikolaus Schaller]

/Volumes/CaseSensitive/master/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: lcdc0@13050000: $nodename:0: 'lcdc0@13050000' does not match '^lcd-controller@[0-9a-f]+$'
	From schema: /Volumes/CaseSensitive/master/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/ingenic,lcd.yaml
/Volumes/CaseSensitive/master/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: lcdc0@13050000: clock-names:0: 'lcd_pclk' was expected
	From schema: /Volumes/CaseSensitive/master/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/ingenic,lcd.yaml
/Volumes/CaseSensitive/master/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: lcdc0@13050000: clock-names:1: 'lcd' was expected
	From schema: /Volumes/CaseSensitive/master/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/ingenic,lcd.yaml
/Volumes/CaseSensitive/master/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: lcdc1@130a0000: $nodename:0: 'lcdc1@130a0000' does not match '^lcd-controller@[0-9a-f]+$'
	From schema: /Volumes/CaseSensitive/master/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/ingenic,lcd.yaml
/Volumes/CaseSensitive/master/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: lcdc1@130a0000: clock-names:0: 'lcd_pclk' was expected
	From schema: /Volumes/CaseSensitive/master/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/ingenic,lcd.yaml
/Volumes/CaseSensitive/master/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: lcdc1@130a0000: clock-names:1: 'lcd' was expected
	From schema: /Volumes/CaseSensitive/master/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/ingenic,lcd.yaml

Signed-off-by: H. Nikolaus Schaller <hns@goldelico.com>
---
 arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi | 12 ++++++------
 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi b/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi
index c5124459678b7..8b95486c8afa7 100644
--- a/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi
+++ b/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi
@@ -457,12 +457,12 @@ hdmi: hdmi@10180000 {
 		status = "disabled";
 	};
 
-	lcdc0: lcdc0@13050000 {
+	lcdc0: lcd-controller@13050000 {
 		compatible = "ingenic,jz4780-lcd";
 		reg = <0x13050000 0x1800>;
 
-		clocks = <&cgu JZ4780_CLK_TVE>, <&cgu JZ4780_CLK_LCD0PIXCLK>;
-		clock-names = "lcd", "lcd_pclk";
+		clocks = <&cgu JZ4780_CLK_LCD0PIXCLK>, <&cgu JZ4780_CLK_TVE>;
+		clock-names = "lcd_pclk", "lcd";
 
 		interrupt-parent = <&intc>;
 		interrupts = <31>;
@@ -470,12 +470,12 @@ lcdc0: lcdc0@13050000 {
 		status = "disabled";
 	};
 
-	lcdc1: lcdc1@130a0000 {
+	lcdc1: lcd-controller@130a0000 {
 		compatible = "ingenic,jz4780-lcd";
 		reg = <0x130a0000 0x1800>;
 
-		clocks = <&cgu JZ4780_CLK_TVE>, <&cgu JZ4780_CLK_LCD1PIXCLK>;
-		clock-names = "lcd", "lcd_pclk";
+		clocks = <&cgu JZ4780_CLK_LCD1PIXCLK>, <&cgu JZ4780_CLK_TVE>;
+		clock-names = "lcd_pclk", "lcd";
 
 		interrupt-parent = <&intc>;
 		interrupts = <23>;
-- 
2.33.0

Re: [PATCH 08/18] MIPS: DTS: jz4780: fix lcd controllers as reported by dtbscheck

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 08/04/2022 20:37, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
> /Volumes/CaseSensitive/master/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: lcdc0@13050000: $nodename:0: 'lcdc0@13050000' does not match '^lcd-controller@[0-9a-f]+$'
> 	From schema: /Volumes/CaseSensitive/master/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/ingenic,lcd.yaml
> /Volumes/CaseSensitive/master/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: lcdc0@13050000: clock-names:0: 'lcd_pclk' was expected
> 	From schema: /Volumes/CaseSensitive/master/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/ingenic,lcd.yaml
> /Volumes/CaseSensitive/master/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: lcdc0@13050000: clock-names:1: 'lcd' was expected
> 	From schema: /Volumes/CaseSensitive/master/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/ingenic,lcd.yaml

It's enough, no need to have two same warnings, so all duplicated
messages below can be removed.

With that change:
Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>


Best regards,
Krzysztof

[PATCH 09/18] MIPS: DTS: jz4780: fix dma-controller as reported by dtbscheck

[H. Nikolaus Schaller]

/Volumes/CaseSensitive/master/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: dma@13420000: $nodename:0: 'dma@13420000' does not match '^dma-controller(@.*)?$'
	From schema: /Volumes/CaseSensitive/master/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dma/ingenic,dma.yaml

Signed-off-by: H. Nikolaus Schaller <hns@goldelico.com>
---
 arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi b/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi
index 8b95486c8afa7..dc88f9e813453 100644
--- a/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi
+++ b/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi
@@ -515,7 +515,7 @@ eth0_addr: eth-mac-addr@22 {
 		};
 	};
 
-	dma: dma@13420000 {
+	dma: dma-controller@13420000 {
 		compatible = "ingenic,jz4780-dma";
 		reg = <0x13420000 0x400>, <0x13421000 0x40>;
 		#dma-cells = <2>;
-- 
2.33.0

Re: [PATCH 09/18] MIPS: DTS: jz4780: fix dma-controller as reported by dtbscheck

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 08/04/2022 20:37, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
> /Volumes/CaseSensitive/master/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: dma@13420000: $nodename:0: 'dma@13420000' does not match '^dma-controller(@.*)?$'
> 	From schema: /Volumes/CaseSensitive/master/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dma/ingenic,dma.yaml
> 
> Signed-off-by: H. Nikolaus Schaller <hns@goldelico.com>
> ---
>  arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi b/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi
> index 8b95486c8afa7..dc88f9e813453 100644
> --- a/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi
> +++ b/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi
> @@ -515,7 +515,7 @@ eth0_addr: eth-mac-addr@22 {
>  		};
>  	};
>  
> -	dma: dma@13420000 {
> +	dma: dma-controller@13420000 {

Fix all the files.

Best regards,
Krzysztof

[PATCH 10/18] MIPS: DTS: jz4780: fix uart dmas as reported by dtbscheck

[H. Nikolaus Schaller]

arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10030000: 'dmas' is a required property
	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10030000: 'dma-names' is a required property
	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10031000: 'dmas' is a required property
	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10031000: 'dma-names' is a required property
	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10032000: 'dmas' is a required property
	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10032000: 'dma-names' is a required property
	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10033000: 'dmas' is a required property
	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10033000: 'dma-names' is a required property
	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10034000: 'dmas' is a required property
	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10034000: 'dma-names' is a required property
	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: i2c@10050000: 'dmas' is a required property

Signed-off-by: H. Nikolaus Schaller <hns@goldelico.com>
---
 arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi | 20 ++++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+)

diff --git a/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi b/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi
index dc88f9e813453..73cd05cf26472 100644
--- a/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi
+++ b/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi
@@ -283,6 +283,10 @@ uart0: serial@10030000 {
 		clocks = <&ext>, <&cgu JZ4780_CLK_UART0>;
 		clock-names = "baud", "module";
 
+		dmas = <&dma JZ4780_DMA_UART0_RX 0xffffffff>,
+		       <&dma JZ4780_DMA_UART0_TX 0xffffffff>;
+		dma-names = "rx", "tx";
+
 		status = "disabled";
 	};
 
@@ -296,6 +300,10 @@ uart1: serial@10031000 {
 		clocks = <&ext>, <&cgu JZ4780_CLK_UART1>;
 		clock-names = "baud", "module";
 
+		dmas = <&dma JZ4780_DMA_UART1_RX 0xffffffff>,
+		       <&dma JZ4780_DMA_UART1_TX 0xffffffff>;
+		dma-names = "rx", "tx";
+
 		status = "disabled";
 	};
 
@@ -309,6 +317,10 @@ uart2: serial@10032000 {
 		clocks = <&ext>, <&cgu JZ4780_CLK_UART2>;
 		clock-names = "baud", "module";
 
+		dmas = <&dma JZ4780_DMA_UART2_RX 0xffffffff>,
+		       <&dma JZ4780_DMA_UART2_TX 0xffffffff>;
+		dma-names = "rx", "tx";
+
 		status = "disabled";
 	};
 
@@ -322,6 +334,10 @@ uart3: serial@10033000 {
 		clocks = <&ext>, <&cgu JZ4780_CLK_UART3>;
 		clock-names = "baud", "module";
 
+		dmas = <&dma JZ4780_DMA_UART3_RX 0xffffffff>,
+		       <&dma JZ4780_DMA_UART3_TX 0xffffffff>;
+		dma-names = "rx", "tx";
+
 		status = "disabled";
 	};
 
@@ -335,6 +351,10 @@ uart4: serial@10034000 {
 		clocks = <&ext>, <&cgu JZ4780_CLK_UART4>;
 		clock-names = "baud", "module";
 
+		dmas = <&dma JZ4780_DMA_UART4_RX 0xffffffff>,
+		       <&dma JZ4780_DMA_UART4_TX 0xffffffff>;
+		dma-names = "rx", "tx";
+
 		status = "disabled";
 	};
 
-- 
2.33.0

Re: [PATCH 10/18] MIPS: DTS: jz4780: fix uart dmas as reported by dtbscheck

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 08/04/2022 20:37, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
> arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10030000: 'dmas' is a required property
> 	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
> arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10030000: 'dma-names' is a required property
> 	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
> arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10031000: 'dmas' is a required property
> 	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
> arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10031000: 'dma-names' is a required property
> 	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
> arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10032000: 'dmas' is a required property
> 	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
> arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10032000: 'dma-names' is a required property
> 	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
> arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10033000: 'dmas' is a required property
> 	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
> arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10033000: 'dma-names' is a required property
> 	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
> arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10034000: 'dmas' is a required property
> 	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
> arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10034000: 'dma-names' is a required property
> 	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
> arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: i2c@10050000: 'dmas' is a required property

All these warnings are the same two warnings...


Best regards,
Krzysztof

Re: [PATCH 10/18] MIPS: DTS: jz4780: fix uart dmas as reported by dtbscheck

[H. Nikolaus Schaller]

> Am 09.04.2022 um 13:18 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>:
> 
> On 08/04/2022 20:37, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
>> arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10030000: 'dmas' is a required property
>> 	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
>> arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10030000: 'dma-names' is a required property
>> 	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
>> arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10031000: 'dmas' is a required property
>> 	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
>> arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10031000: 'dma-names' is a required property
>> 	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
>> arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10032000: 'dmas' is a required property
>> 	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
>> arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10032000: 'dma-names' is a required property
>> 	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
>> arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10033000: 'dmas' is a required property
>> 	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
>> arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10033000: 'dma-names' is a required property
>> 	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
>> arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10034000: 'dmas' is a required property
>> 	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
>> arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10034000: 'dma-names' is a required property
>> 	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
>> arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: i2c@10050000: 'dmas' is a required property
> 
> All these warnings are the same two warnings...

See my earlier explanation that without them you can't verify by just reading commit message
and diff that all existing warnings have been addressed.

Re: [PATCH 10/18] MIPS: DTS: jz4780: fix uart dmas as reported by dtbscheck

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 09/04/2022 15:07, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
> 
> 
>> Am 09.04.2022 um 13:18 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>:
>>
>> On 08/04/2022 20:37, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
>>> arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10030000: 'dmas' is a required property
>>> 	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
>>> arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10030000: 'dma-names' is a required property
>>> 	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
>>> arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10031000: 'dmas' is a required property
>>> 	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
>>> arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10031000: 'dma-names' is a required property
>>> 	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
>>> arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10032000: 'dmas' is a required property
>>> 	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
>>> arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10032000: 'dma-names' is a required property
>>> 	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
>>> arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10033000: 'dmas' is a required property
>>> 	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
>>> arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10033000: 'dma-names' is a required property
>>> 	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
>>> arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10034000: 'dmas' is a required property
>>> 	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
>>> arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10034000: 'dma-names' is a required property
>>> 	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
>>> arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: i2c@10050000: 'dmas' is a required property
>>
>> All these warnings are the same two warnings...
> 
> See my earlier explanation that without them you can't verify by just reading commit message
> and diff that all existing warnings have been addressed.

Which does not make sense and there is no need... Automation does it
(see Rob's tools). Don't make human life more difficult...

Best regards,
Krzysztof

Re: [PATCH 10/18] MIPS: DTS: jz4780: fix uart dmas as reported by dtbscheck

[H. Nikolaus Schaller]

> Am 09.04.2022 um 15:16 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>:
> 
> On 09/04/2022 15:07, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>> Am 09.04.2022 um 13:18 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>:
>>> 
>>> On 08/04/2022 20:37, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
>>>> arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10030000: 'dmas' is a required property
>>>> 	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
>>>> arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10030000: 'dma-names' is a required property
>>>> 	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
>>>> arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10031000: 'dmas' is a required property
>>>> 	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
>>>> arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10031000: 'dma-names' is a required property
>>>> 	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
>>>> arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10032000: 'dmas' is a required property
>>>> 	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
>>>> arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10032000: 'dma-names' is a required property
>>>> 	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
>>>> arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10033000: 'dmas' is a required property
>>>> 	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
>>>> arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10033000: 'dma-names' is a required property
>>>> 	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
>>>> arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10034000: 'dmas' is a required property
>>>> 	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
>>>> arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: serial@10034000: 'dma-names' is a required property
>>>> 	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/ingenic,uart.yaml
>>>> arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: i2c@10050000: 'dmas' is a required property
>>> 
>>> All these warnings are the same two warnings...
>> 
>> See my earlier explanation that without them you can't verify by just reading commit message
>> and diff that all existing warnings have been addressed.
> 
> Which does not make sense and there is no need... Automation does it
> (see Rob's tools). Don't make human life more difficult...

Ok, you are right. If you apply this patch and then run dtbscheck again, there would be
a warning left over.

But may I honestly ask why you review the commits and read the commit message at all?
You could simply ignore it... And it would be easier for both of us to leave it completely
to Rob's tools :)

BR and thanks,
Nikolaus

Re: [PATCH 10/18] MIPS: DTS: jz4780: fix uart dmas as reported by dtbscheck

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 09/04/2022 15:26, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
>>
>> Which does not make sense and there is no need... Automation does it
>> (see Rob's tools). Don't make human life more difficult...
> 
> Ok, you are right. If you apply this patch and then run dtbscheck again, there would be
> a warning left over.
> 
> But may I honestly ask why you review the commits and read the commit message at all?
> You could simply ignore it... And it would be easier for both of us to leave it completely
> to Rob's tools :)
>

I am not reading it. :) It takes more effort to scroll to the actual
contents.

Best regards,
Krzysztof

Re: [PATCH 10/18] MIPS: DTS: jz4780: fix uart dmas as reported by dtbscheck

[H. Nikolaus Schaller]

> Am 09.04.2022 um 15:28 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>:
> 
> On 09/04/2022 15:26, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
>>> 
>>> Which does not make sense and there is no need... Automation does it
>>> (see Rob's tools). Don't make human life more difficult...
>> 
>> Ok, you are right. If you apply this patch and then run dtbscheck again, there would be
>> a warning left over.
>> 
>> But may I honestly ask why you review the commits and read the commit message at all?
>> You could simply ignore it... And it would be easier for both of us to leave it completely
>> to Rob's tools :)
>> 
> 
> I am not reading it. :) It takes more effort to scroll to the actual
> contents.

Ok, now I got it...

Maybe I have a larger screen so that it doesn't even need scrolling and therefore don't notice this difference.
So may I leave it as it is since you don't read it anyways :)

> 
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof

BR and thanks,
Nikolaus

[PATCH 11/18] MIPS: DTS: jz4780: fix i2c dmas as reported by dtbscheck

[H. Nikolaus Schaller]

arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: i2c@10050000: 'dma-names' is a required property
	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/ingenic,i2c.yaml
arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: i2c@10051000: 'dmas' is a required property
	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/ingenic,i2c.yaml
arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: i2c@10051000: 'dma-names' is a required property
	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/ingenic,i2c.yaml
arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: i2c@10052000: 'dmas' is a required property
	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/ingenic,i2c.yaml
arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: i2c@10052000: 'dma-names' is a required property
	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/ingenic,i2c.yaml
arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: i2c@10053000: 'dmas' is a required property
	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/ingenic,i2c.yaml
arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: i2c@10053000: 'dma-names' is a required property
	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/ingenic,i2c.yaml
arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: i2c@10054000: 'dmas' is a required property
	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/ingenic,i2c.yaml
arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: i2c@10054000: 'dma-names' is a required property
	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/ingenic,i2c.yaml

Signed-off-by: H. Nikolaus Schaller <hns@goldelico.com>
---
 arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi | 20 ++++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+)

diff --git a/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi b/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi
index 73cd05cf26472..dcb93d0158856 100644
--- a/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi
+++ b/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi
@@ -392,6 +392,10 @@ i2c0: i2c@10050000 {
 		pinctrl-names = "default";
 		pinctrl-0 = <&pins_i2c0_data>;
 
+		dmas = <&dma JZ4780_DMA_SMB0_RX 0xffffffff>,
+		       <&dma JZ4780_DMA_SMB0_TX 0xffffffff>;
+		dma-names = "rx", "tx";
+
 		status = "disabled";
 	};
 
@@ -409,6 +413,10 @@ i2c1: i2c@10051000 {
 		pinctrl-names = "default";
 		pinctrl-0 = <&pins_i2c1_data>;
 
+		dmas = <&dma JZ4780_DMA_SMB1_RX 0xffffffff>,
+		       <&dma JZ4780_DMA_SMB1_TX 0xffffffff>;
+		dma-names = "rx", "tx";
+
 		status = "disabled";
 	};
 
@@ -426,6 +434,10 @@ i2c2: i2c@10052000 {
 		pinctrl-names = "default";
 		pinctrl-0 = <&pins_i2c2_data>;
 
+		dmas = <&dma JZ4780_DMA_SMB2_RX 0xffffffff>,
+		       <&dma JZ4780_DMA_SMB2_TX 0xffffffff>;
+		dma-names = "rx", "tx";
+
 		status = "disabled";
 	};
 
@@ -443,6 +455,10 @@ i2c3: i2c@10053000 {
 		pinctrl-names = "default";
 		pinctrl-0 = <&pins_i2c3_data>;
 
+		dmas = <&dma JZ4780_DMA_SMB3_RX 0xffffffff>,
+		       <&dma JZ4780_DMA_SMB3_TX 0xffffffff>;
+		dma-names = "rx", "tx";
+
 		status = "disabled";
 	};
 
@@ -460,6 +476,10 @@ i2c4: i2c@10054000 {
 		pinctrl-names = "default";
 		pinctrl-0 = <&pins_i2c4_data>;
 
+		dmas = <&dma JZ4780_DMA_SMB4_RX 0xffffffff>,
+		       <&dma JZ4780_DMA_SMB4_TX 0xffffffff>;
+		dma-names = "rx", "tx";
+
 		status = "disabled";
 	};
 
-- 
2.33.0

[PATCH 12/18] MIPS: DTS: jz4780: fix nemc memory controller as reported by dtbscheck

[H. Nikolaus Schaller]

arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: nemc@13410000: $nodename:0: 'nemc@13410000' does not match '^memory-controller@[0-9a-f]+$'
	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/ingenic,nemc.yaml

Signed-off-by: H. Nikolaus Schaller <hns@goldelico.com>
---
 arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi b/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi
index dcb93d0158856..cf259dac519ad 100644
--- a/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi
+++ b/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi
@@ -523,7 +523,7 @@ lcdc1: lcd-controller@130a0000 {
 		status = "disabled";
 	};
 
-	nemc: nemc@13410000 {
+	nemc: memory-controller@13410000 {
 		compatible = "ingenic,jz4780-nemc", "simple-mfd";
 		reg = <0x13410000 0x10000>;
 		#address-cells = <2>;
-- 
2.33.0

Re: [PATCH 12/18] MIPS: DTS: jz4780: fix nemc memory controller as reported by dtbscheck

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 08/04/2022 20:37, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
> arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: nemc@13410000: $nodename:0: 'nemc@13410000' does not match '^memory-controller@[0-9a-f]+$'
> 	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/ingenic,nemc.yaml
> 
> Signed-off-by: H. Nikolaus Schaller <hns@goldelico.com>
> ---
>  arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4780.dtsi | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 


Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>


Best regards,
Krzysztof

[PATCH 13/18] dt-bindings: fix jz4780-nemc issue as reported by dtbscheck

[H. Nikolaus Schaller]

jz4780-nemc needs to be compatible to simple-mfd as well or we get

arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: memory-controller@13410000: compatible: 'oneOf' conditional failed, one must be fixed:
	['ingenic,jz4780-nemc', 'simple-mfd'] is too long
	'ingenic,jz4725b-nemc' was expected
	'ingenic,jz4740-nemc' was expected
	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/ingenic,nemc.yaml

Signed-off-by: H. Nikolaus Schaller <hns@goldelico.com>
---
 .../devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/ingenic,nemc.yaml    | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/ingenic,nemc.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/ingenic,nemc.yaml
index 24f9e19820282..3b1116588de3d 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/ingenic,nemc.yaml
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/ingenic,nemc.yaml
@@ -17,7 +17,7 @@ properties:
     oneOf:
       - enum:
           - ingenic,jz4740-nemc
-          - ingenic,jz4780-nemc
+          - [ ingenic,jz4780-nemc, simple-mfd ]
       - items:
           - const: ingenic,jz4725b-nemc
           - const: ingenic,jz4740-nemc
-- 
2.33.0

Re: [PATCH 13/18] dt-bindings: fix jz4780-nemc issue as reported by dtbscheck

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 08/04/2022 20:37, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
> jz4780-nemc needs to be compatible to simple-mfd as well or we get
> 
> arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: memory-controller@13410000: compatible: 'oneOf' conditional failed, one must be fixed:
> 	['ingenic,jz4780-nemc', 'simple-mfd'] is too long
> 	'ingenic,jz4725b-nemc' was expected
> 	'ingenic,jz4740-nemc' was expected
> 	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/ingenic,nemc.yaml
> 
> Signed-off-by: H. Nikolaus Schaller <hns@goldelico.com>
> ---
>  .../devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/ingenic,nemc.yaml    | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/ingenic,nemc.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/ingenic,nemc.yaml
> index 24f9e19820282..3b1116588de3d 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/ingenic,nemc.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/ingenic,nemc.yaml
> @@ -17,7 +17,7 @@ properties:
>      oneOf:
>        - enum:
>            - ingenic,jz4740-nemc
> -          - ingenic,jz4780-nemc
> +          - [ ingenic,jz4780-nemc, simple-mfd ]

This is not correct representation. If you really need simple-mfd, then
this should be a separate item below oneOf.

The true question is whether you need simple-mfd. Isn't the binding (and
the driver) expected to instantiate its children?

>        - items:
>            - const: ingenic,jz4725b-nemc
>            - const: ingenic,jz4740-nemc


Best regards,
Krzysztof

Re: [PATCH 13/18] dt-bindings: fix jz4780-nemc issue as reported by dtbscheck

[Paul Cercueil]

Hi Krzysztof,

Le sam., avril 9 2022 at 13:26:25 +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski 
<krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> a écrit :
> On 08/04/2022 20:37, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
>>  jz4780-nemc needs to be compatible to simple-mfd as well or we get
>> 
>>  arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: memory-controller@13410000: 
>> compatible: 'oneOf' conditional failed, one must be fixed:
>>  	['ingenic,jz4780-nemc', 'simple-mfd'] is too long
>>  	'ingenic,jz4725b-nemc' was expected
>>  	'ingenic,jz4740-nemc' was expected
>>  	From schema: 
>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/ingenic,nemc.yaml
>> 
>>  Signed-off-by: H. Nikolaus Schaller <hns@goldelico.com>
>>  ---
>>   .../devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/ingenic,nemc.yaml    | 
>> 2 +-
>>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>> 
>>  diff --git 
>> a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/ingenic,nemc.yaml 
>> b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/ingenic,nemc.yaml
>>  index 24f9e19820282..3b1116588de3d 100644
>>  --- 
>> a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/ingenic,nemc.yaml
>>  +++ 
>> b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/ingenic,nemc.yaml
>>  @@ -17,7 +17,7 @@ properties:
>>       oneOf:
>>         - enum:
>>             - ingenic,jz4740-nemc
>>  -          - ingenic,jz4780-nemc
>>  +          - [ ingenic,jz4780-nemc, simple-mfd ]
> 
> This is not correct representation. If you really need simple-mfd, 
> then
> this should be a separate item below oneOf.

Correct.

> The true question is whether you need simple-mfd. Isn't the binding 
> (and
> the driver) expected to instantiate its children?

I can explain that one. There is the EFUSE controller located inside 
the nemc's memory area, and the two are pretty much unrelated, hence 
the "simple-mfd" compatible string.

Cheers,
-Paul

Re: [PATCH 13/18] dt-bindings: fix jz4780-nemc issue as reported by dtbscheck

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 09/04/2022 14:37, Paul Cercueil wrote:
>> The true question is whether you need simple-mfd. Isn't the binding 
>> (and
>> the driver) expected to instantiate its children?
> 
> I can explain that one. There is the EFUSE controller located inside 
> the nemc's memory area, and the two are pretty much unrelated, hence 
> the "simple-mfd" compatible string.

I saw the efuse children and that's why I asked who is expected to
populate them. You said that simple-mfd is required for this, I say no.
It should work without simple-mfd...

I am kind of repeating myself but I really do not see the need of
simple-mfd in the bindings.

Best regards,
Krzysztof

Re: [PATCH 13/18] dt-bindings: fix jz4780-nemc issue as reported by dtbscheck

[Paul Cercueil]

Le sam., avril 9 2022 at 14:47:23 +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski 
<krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> a écrit :
> On 09/04/2022 14:37, Paul Cercueil wrote:
>>>  The true question is whether you need simple-mfd. Isn't the binding
>>>  (and
>>>  the driver) expected to instantiate its children?
>> 
>>  I can explain that one. There is the EFUSE controller located inside
>>  the nemc's memory area, and the two are pretty much unrelated, hence
>>  the "simple-mfd" compatible string.
> 
> I saw the efuse children and that's why I asked who is expected to
> populate them. You said that simple-mfd is required for this, I say 
> no.
> It should work without simple-mfd...
> 
> I am kind of repeating myself but I really do not see the need of
> simple-mfd in the bindings.

Well, it is a "simple MFD", so I don't see why we can't use the 
"simple-mfd" compatible. Why would we not want to use it?

Besides, if the nemc driver is responsible for populating the efuse 
device, that means the nemc driver must be enabled for the efuse to 
work, which is nonsense, the two IP blocks being unrelated.

-Paul

Re: [PATCH 13/18] dt-bindings: fix jz4780-nemc issue as reported by dtbscheck

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 09/04/2022 14:55, Paul Cercueil wrote:
>>
>> I saw the efuse children and that's why I asked who is expected to
>> populate them. You said that simple-mfd is required for this, I say 
>> no.
>> It should work without simple-mfd...
>>
>> I am kind of repeating myself but I really do not see the need of
>> simple-mfd in the bindings.
> 
> Well, it is a "simple MFD",

It's not a simple MFD, it is a memory controller. MFD is a purely
Linux/software term, so there are no devices which are MFD. Everything
which we model as MFD is actually something else in real life (e.g.
PMIC, memory controller, system controller).

> so I don't see why we can't use the 
> "simple-mfd" compatible. Why would we not want to use it?

No one said that you cannot. You just might not need...

> 
> Besides, if the nemc driver is responsible for populating the efuse 
> device, that means the nemc driver must be enabled for the efuse to 
> work, which is nonsense, the two IP blocks being unrelated.

That's actually the explanation I was looking for. It would be nice to
use it in commit msg instead of the dtbs_check warning.


Best regards,
Krzysztof

Re: [PATCH 13/18] dt-bindings: fix jz4780-nemc issue as reported by dtbscheck

[H. Nikolaus Schaller]

> Am 09.04.2022 um 13:26 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>:
> 
> On 08/04/2022 20:37, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
>> jz4780-nemc needs to be compatible to simple-mfd as well or we get
>> 
>> arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: memory-controller@13410000: compatible: 'oneOf' conditional failed, one must be fixed:
>> 	['ingenic,jz4780-nemc', 'simple-mfd'] is too long
>> 	'ingenic,jz4725b-nemc' was expected
>> 	'ingenic,jz4740-nemc' was expected
>> 	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/ingenic,nemc.yaml
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: H. Nikolaus Schaller <hns@goldelico.com>
>> ---
>> .../devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/ingenic,nemc.yaml    | 2 +-
>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>> 
>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/ingenic,nemc.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/ingenic,nemc.yaml
>> index 24f9e19820282..3b1116588de3d 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/ingenic,nemc.yaml
>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/ingenic,nemc.yaml
>> @@ -17,7 +17,7 @@ properties:
>>     oneOf:
>>       - enum:
>>           - 
>> -          - ingenic,jz4780-nemc
>> +          - [ , simple-mfd ]
> 
> This is not correct representation. If you really need simple-mfd, then
> this should be a separate item below oneOf.

Well, it is valid YAML syntax and seems to be accepted by dtbscheck.

> The true question is whether you need simple-mfd. Isn't the binding (and
> the driver) expected to instantiate its children?

I had expected that but current ingenic,jz4780-nemc code doesn't.

Everything is explained in 190607f2d59e174bcf8415efb1bb390737f8d428

But if someone writes a fix for the ingenic,jz4740-nemc driever
we can of course live without this patch. And partially revert
190607f2d59e174bcf8415efb1bb390737f8d428

Re: [PATCH 13/18] dt-bindings: fix jz4780-nemc issue as reported by dtbscheck

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 09/04/2022 15:09, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
> 
> 
>> Am 09.04.2022 um 13:26 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>:
>>
>> On 08/04/2022 20:37, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
>>> jz4780-nemc needs to be compatible to simple-mfd as well or we get
>>>
>>> arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: memory-controller@13410000: compatible: 'oneOf' conditional failed, one must be fixed:
>>> 	['ingenic,jz4780-nemc', 'simple-mfd'] is too long
>>> 	'ingenic,jz4725b-nemc' was expected
>>> 	'ingenic,jz4740-nemc' was expected
>>> 	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/ingenic,nemc.yaml
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: H. Nikolaus Schaller <hns@goldelico.com>
>>> ---
>>> .../devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/ingenic,nemc.yaml    | 2 +-
>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/ingenic,nemc.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/ingenic,nemc.yaml
>>> index 24f9e19820282..3b1116588de3d 100644
>>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/ingenic,nemc.yaml
>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/ingenic,nemc.yaml
>>> @@ -17,7 +17,7 @@ properties:
>>>     oneOf:
>>>       - enum:
>>>           - 
>>> -          - ingenic,jz4780-nemc
>>> +          - [ , simple-mfd ]
>>
>> This is not correct representation. If you really need simple-mfd, then
>> this should be a separate item below oneOf.
> 
> Well, it is valid YAML syntax and seems to be accepted by dtbscheck.

It's not how we code it. Please do not introduce inconsistent - even if
valid - blocks.

> 
>> The true question is whether you need simple-mfd. Isn't the binding (and
>> the driver) expected to instantiate its children?
> 
> I had expected that but current ingenic,jz4780-nemc code doesn't.

Paul provided good reason for the simple-mfd. Use this one instead of dt
check warning. DT check warning means nothing, does not bring the actual
answer to "why", because it is artificial tool. The answer to "why" is
in what Paul wrote.

Best regards,
Krzysztof

Re: [PATCH 13/18] dt-bindings: fix jz4780-nemc issue as reported by dtbscheck

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 09/04/2022 15:18, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 09/04/2022 15:09, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:

(...)

>>>> @@ -17,7 +17,7 @@ properties:
>>>>     oneOf:
>>>>       - enum:
>>>>           - 
>>>> -          - ingenic,jz4780-nemc
>>>> +          - [ , simple-mfd ]
>>>
>>> This is not correct representation. If you really need simple-mfd, then
>>> this should be a separate item below oneOf.
>>
>> Well, it is valid YAML syntax and seems to be accepted by dtbscheck.

Minor update:
Well, it is not a valid schema. Rob's checker now confirmed. If you run
dt_bindings_check by yourself you will see the error:

   properties:compatible:oneOf:0:enum:1: ['ingenic', 'jz4780-nemc',
'simple-mfd'] is not of type 'string'

Probably because enum expects string, not another enum (so enum inside
enum is not correct).

If you do not see the error, you might be missing some packages
(mentioned in writing-schema + yamllint for a different issue) or your
dtschema is old.

> 
> It's not how we code it. Please do not introduce inconsistent - even if
> valid - blocks.


Best regards,
Krzysztof

Re: [PATCH 13/18] dt-bindings: fix jz4780-nemc issue as reported by dtbscheck

[H. Nikolaus Schaller]

Hi,

> Am 10.04.2022 um 17:35 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>:
> 
> On 09/04/2022 15:18, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 09/04/2022 15:09, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
> 
> (...)
> 
>>>>> @@ -17,7 +17,7 @@ properties:
>>>>>    oneOf:
>>>>>      - enum:
>>>>>          - 
>>>>> -          - ingenic,jz4780-nemc
>>>>> +          - [ , simple-mfd ]
>>>> 
>>>> This is not correct representation. If you really need simple-mfd, then
>>>> this should be a separate item below oneOf.
>>> 
>>> Well, it is valid YAML syntax and seems to be accepted by dtbscheck.
> 
> Minor update:
> Well, it is not a valid schema. Rob's checker now confirmed. If you run
> dt_bindings_check by yourself you will see the error:

I did run dt_bindings_check. Otherwise I wouldn't have seen that there is a problem
at all, before suggesting these changes...

> 
>   properties:compatible:oneOf:0:enum:1: ['ingenic', 'jz4780-nemc',
> 'simple-mfd'] is not of type 'string'
> 
> Probably because enum expects string, not another enum (so enum inside
> enum is not correct).
> 
> If you do not see the error, you might be missing some packages
> (mentioned in writing-schema + yamllint for a different issue) or your
> dtschema is old.

Neither.

yamllint etc. are all the most recent versions. Updated just two days ago.

But my filter looking for ci20.dtb did not catch it because the report
doesn't mention that file.

So Rob's robot is more mature than mine...

BR,
Nikolaus

Re: [PATCH 13/18] dt-bindings: fix jz4780-nemc issue as reported by dtbscheck

[Rob Herring]

On Fri, 08 Apr 2022 20:37:56 +0200, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
> jz4780-nemc needs to be compatible to simple-mfd as well or we get
> 
> arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: memory-controller@13410000: compatible: 'oneOf' conditional failed, one must be fixed:
> 	['ingenic,jz4780-nemc', 'simple-mfd'] is too long
> 	'ingenic,jz4725b-nemc' was expected
> 	'ingenic,jz4740-nemc' was expected
> 	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/ingenic,nemc.yaml
> 
> Signed-off-by: H. Nikolaus Schaller <hns@goldelico.com>
> ---
>  .../devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/ingenic,nemc.yaml    | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 

My bot found errors running 'make DT_CHECKER_FLAGS=-m dt_binding_check'
on your patch (DT_CHECKER_FLAGS is new in v5.13):

yamllint warnings/errors:
./Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/ingenic,nemc.yaml:20:23: [warning] too few spaces after comma (commas)

dtschema/dtc warnings/errors:
/builds/robherring/linux-dt-review/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/ingenic,nemc.yaml: properties:compatible:oneOf:0:enum:1: ['ingenic', 'jz4780-nemc', 'simple-mfd'] is not of type 'string'
	from schema $id: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/string-array.yaml#
/builds/robherring/linux-dt-review/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/ingenic,nemc.yaml: ignoring, error in schema: properties: compatible: oneOf: 0: enum: 1
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mtd/ingenic,nand.example.dtb:0:0: /example-0/memory-controller@13410000: failed to match any schema with compatible: ['ingenic,jz4780-nemc']
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/ingenic,nemc.example.dtb:0:0: /example-0/memory-controller@13410000: failed to match any schema with compatible: ['ingenic,jz4780-nemc']

doc reference errors (make refcheckdocs):

See https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/

This check can fail if there are any dependencies. The base for a patch
series is generally the most recent rc1.

If you already ran 'make dt_binding_check' and didn't see the above
error(s), then make sure 'yamllint' is installed and dt-schema is up to
date:

pip3 install dtschema --upgrade

Please check and re-submit.

[PATCH 14/18] MIPS: DTS: CI20: add missing model as reported by dtbscheck

[H. Nikolaus Schaller]

arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: /: 'model' is a required property
	From schema: dtschema/schemas/root-node.yaml

Signed-off-by: H. Nikolaus Schaller <hns@goldelico.com>
---
 arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dts | 2 ++
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)

diff --git a/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dts b/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dts
index ab6e3dc0bc1d0..cb5257d32b55e 100644
--- a/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dts
+++ b/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dts
@@ -11,6 +11,8 @@
 / {
 	compatible = "img,ci20", "ingenic,jz4780";
 
+	model = "Imagination creator CI20";
+
 	aliases {
 		serial0 = &uart0;
 		serial1 = &uart1;
-- 
2.33.0

[PATCH 15/18] MIPS: DTS: CI20: fix fixed regulators as reported by dtbscheck

[H. Nikolaus Schaller]

arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: /: fixedregulator@0: 'anyOf' conditional failed, one must be fixed:
	'reg' is a required property
	'ranges' is a required property
	From schema: python/site-packages/dtschema/schemas/root-node.yaml
arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: /: fixedregulator@1: 'anyOf' conditional failed, one must be fixed:
	'reg' is a required property
	'ranges' is a required property
	From schema: python/site-packages/dtschema/schemas/root-node.yaml
arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: /: fixedregulator@2: 'anyOf' conditional failed, one must be fixed:
	'reg' is a required property
	'ranges' is a required property
	From schema: python/site-packages/dtschema/schemas/root-node.yaml

Signed-off-by: H. Nikolaus Schaller <hns@goldelico.com>
---
 arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dts | 6 +++---
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dts b/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dts
index cb5257d32b55e..c045c4f75895e 100644
--- a/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dts
+++ b/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dts
@@ -69,7 +69,7 @@ led3 {
 		};
 	};
 
-	eth0_power: fixedregulator@0 {
+	eth0_power: eth3v3 {
 		compatible = "regulator-fixed";
 
 		regulator-name = "eth0_power";
@@ -99,7 +99,7 @@ ir: ir {
 		gpios = <&gpe 3 GPIO_ACTIVE_LOW>;
 	};
 
-	wlan0_power: fixedregulator@1 {
+	wlan0_power: wlan_power {
 		compatible = "regulator-fixed";
 
 		regulator-name = "wlan0_power";
@@ -108,7 +108,7 @@ wlan0_power: fixedregulator@1 {
 		enable-active-high;
 	};
 
-	otg_power: fixedregulator@2 {
+	otg_power: otg5v0 {
 		compatible = "regulator-fixed";
 
 		regulator-name = "otg_power";
-- 
2.33.0

Re: [PATCH 15/18] MIPS: DTS: CI20: fix fixed regulators as reported by dtbscheck

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 08/04/2022 20:37, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
> arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: /: fixedregulator@0: 'anyOf' conditional failed, one must be fixed:
> 	'reg' is a required property
> 	'ranges' is a required property
> 	From schema: python/site-packages/dtschema/schemas/root-node.yaml
> arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: /: fixedregulator@1: 'anyOf' conditional failed, one must be fixed:
> 	'reg' is a required property
> 	'ranges' is a required property
> 	From schema: python/site-packages/dtschema/schemas/root-node.yaml
> arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: /: fixedregulator@2: 'anyOf' conditional failed, one must be fixed:
> 	'reg' is a required property
> 	'ranges' is a required property
> 	From schema: python/site-packages/dtschema/schemas/root-node.yaml
> 
> Signed-off-by: H. Nikolaus Schaller <hns@goldelico.com>
> ---
>  arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dts | 6 +++---
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dts b/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dts
> index cb5257d32b55e..c045c4f75895e 100644
> --- a/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dts
> +++ b/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dts
> @@ -69,7 +69,7 @@ led3 {
>  		};
>  	};
>  
> -	eth0_power: fixedregulator@0 {
> +	eth0_power: eth3v3 {

No, Devicetree spec requires generic node name, so "regulator-0" is
appropriate. See also examples of device tree node names in the spec.
"eth3v3" is a specific one, not generic.


Best regards,
Krzysztof

[PATCH 16/18] MIPS: DTS: CI20: fix /memory as reported by dtbscheck

[H. Nikolaus Schaller]

arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: /: memory: False schema does not allow {device_type: [memory], reg: [[0, 268435456], [805306368, 805306368]]}
	From schema: python/site-packages/dtschema/schemas/root-node.yaml

Signed-off-by: H. Nikolaus Schaller <hns@goldelico.com>
---
 arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dts | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dts b/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dts
index c045c4f75895e..98f0a5ccbb4da 100644
--- a/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dts
+++ b/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dts
@@ -24,7 +24,7 @@ chosen {
 		stdout-path = &uart4;
 	};
 
-	memory {
+	memory@0 {
 		device_type = "memory";
 		reg = <0x0 0x10000000
 		       0x30000000 0x30000000>;
-- 
2.33.0

[PATCH 17/18] MIPS: DTS: CI20: fix wifi as reported by dtbscheck

[H. Nikolaus Schaller]

arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: wifi@1: compatible: oneOf conditional failed, one must be fixed:
	[brcm,bcm4330-fmac] is too short
	brcm,bcm4329-fmac was expected
	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/wireless/brcm,bcm4329-fmac.yaml

Signed-off-by: H. Nikolaus Schaller <hns@goldelico.com>
---
 arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dts | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dts b/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dts
index 98f0a5ccbb4da..dc587b4b36009 100644
--- a/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dts
+++ b/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dts
@@ -176,7 +176,7 @@ &mmc1 {
 
 	brcmf: wifi@1 {
 /*		reg = <4>;*/
-		compatible = "brcm,bcm4330-fmac";
+		compatible = "brcm,bcm4330-fmac", "brcm,bcm4329-fmac";
 		vcc-supply = <&wlan0_power>;
 		device-wakeup-gpios = <&gpd 9 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>;
 		shutdown-gpios = <&gpf 7 GPIO_ACTIVE_LOW>;
-- 
2.33.0

Re: [PATCH 17/18] MIPS: DTS: CI20: fix wifi as reported by dtbscheck

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 08/04/2022 20:38, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
> arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: wifi@1: compatible: oneOf conditional failed, one must be fixed:
> 	[brcm,bcm4330-fmac] is too short
> 	brcm,bcm4329-fmac was expected
> 	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/wireless/brcm,bcm4329-fmac.yaml
> 
> Signed-off-by: H. Nikolaus Schaller <hns@goldelico.com>
> ---
>  arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dts | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 

Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>


Best regards,
Krzysztof

[PATCH 18/18] MIPS: DTS: CI20: fix bluetooth as reported by dtbscheck

[H. Nikolaus Schaller]

arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: bluetooth: vcc-supply does not match any of the regexes: pinctrl-[0-9]+
	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/broadcom-bluetooth.yaml

Signed-off-by: H. Nikolaus Schaller <hns@goldelico.com>
---
 arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dts | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dts b/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dts
index dc587b4b36009..8a120f9374331 100644
--- a/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dts
+++ b/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dts
@@ -207,7 +207,7 @@ &uart2 {
 	bluetooth {
 		compatible = "brcm,bcm4330-bt";
 		reset-gpios = <&gpf 8 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>;
-		vcc-supply = <&wlan0_power>;
+		vbat-supply = <&wlan0_power>;
 		device-wakeup-gpios = <&gpf 5 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>;
 		host-wakeup-gpios = <&gpf 6 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>;
 		shutdown-gpios = <&gpf 4 GPIO_ACTIVE_LOW>;
-- 
2.33.0

Re: [PATCH 18/18] MIPS: DTS: CI20: fix bluetooth as reported by dtbscheck

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 08/04/2022 20:38, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
> arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: bluetooth: vcc-supply does not match any of the regexes: pinctrl-[0-9]+
> 	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/broadcom-bluetooth.yaml
> 
> Signed-off-by: H. Nikolaus Schaller <hns@goldelico.com>
> ---
>  arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dts | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dts b/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dts
> index dc587b4b36009..8a120f9374331 100644
> --- a/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dts
> +++ b/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dts
> @@ -207,7 +207,7 @@ &uart2 {
>  	bluetooth {
>  		compatible = "brcm,bcm4330-bt";
>  		reset-gpios = <&gpf 8 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>;
> -		vcc-supply = <&wlan0_power>;
> +		vbat-supply = <&wlan0_power>;

Could be also vddio...


Acked-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>


Best regards,
Krzysztof

Re: [PATCH 18/18] MIPS: DTS: CI20: fix bluetooth as reported by dtbscheck

[H. Nikolaus Schaller]

> Am 09.04.2022 um 13:22 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>:
> 
> On 08/04/2022 20:38, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
>> arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dtb: bluetooth: vcc-supply does not match any of the regexes: pinctrl-[0-9]+
>> 	From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/broadcom-bluetooth.yaml
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: H. Nikolaus Schaller <hns@goldelico.com>
>> ---
>> arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dts | 2 +-
>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>> 
>> diff --git a/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dts b/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dts
>> index dc587b4b36009..8a120f9374331 100644
>> --- a/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dts
>> +++ b/arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/ci20.dts
>> @@ -207,7 +207,7 @@ &uart2 {
>> 	bluetooth {
>> 		compatible = "brcm,bcm4330-bt";
>> 		reset-gpios = <&gpf 8 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>;
>> -		vcc-supply = <&wlan0_power>;
>> +		vbat-supply = <&wlan0_power>;
> 
> Could be also vddio...

Good hint.

Schematics has both vbat AND vddio connected.

But with that finding, there is also a wifi_io regulator
for 2.5V. It is always-on and NOT yet controlled.

So this is worth a functional addition. But not related
to dtbscheck cleanup because it even is optional.
Hence a separate topic.

> 
> 
> Acked-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>
> 
> 
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof

In summary for reviewing all patches: many thanks!

BR,
Nikolaus