Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] dt-bindings: hwmon: Add Eswin EIC7700 PVT sensor

[Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>]

On 5/12/26 02:16, Huan He wrote:
> Hi Krzysztof,
> 
> Thank you very much for your detailed review. We appreciate the feedback.
> 
>> On Thu, Apr 30, 2026 at 02:44:44PM +0800, hehuan1@eswincomputing.com wrote:
>>> +
>>> +  label:
>>> +    enum:
>>> +      - pvt0
>>> +      - pvt1
>>
>> No, label is user-visible name. Can be whatever user decides.
>>
>> Please read writing bindings - instance IDs are not allowed.
> 
> Thanks for the clarification.
> I am planning to update the next revision as follows. Would this be
> acceptable?
> 
> YAML:
> -  label:
> -    enum:
> -      - pvt0
> -      - pvt1
> +  label: true
> 
> required:
>    - compatible
>    - reg
>    - clocks
>    - interrupts
> - - label
> 
> Driver:
>   static int eic7700_pvt_create_hwmon(struct pvt_hwmon *pvt)
>   {
> -   struct device *dev = pvt->dev;
> -   struct device_node *np = dev->of_node;
> -   const char *node_label;
> -   int type;
> -   const char *names[2] = {"soc_pvt", "ddr_pvt"};
> -
> -   if (of_property_read_string(np, "label", &node_label)) {
> -       dev_err(dev, "Missing 'label' property in DTS node\n");
> -       return -EINVAL;
> -   }
> -
> -   if (strcmp(node_label, "pvt0") == 0) {
> -       type = 0;
> -   } else if (strcmp(node_label, "pvt1") == 0) {
> -       type = 1;
> -   } else {
> -       dev_err(pvt->dev, "Unsupported label: %s\n", node_label);
> -       return -EINVAL;
> -   }
> +   const char *name = "pvt";
> +
> +   of_property_read_string(pvt->dev->of_node, "label", &name);
>   
> -   pvt->hwmon = devm_hwmon_device_register_with_info(pvt->dev, names[type],
> +   pvt->hwmon = devm_hwmon_device_register_with_info(pvt->dev, name,
>                                pvt, &pvt_hwmon_info,
>                                NULL);
> 

This would try to register a free-text name for the hwmon device,
which would be unacceptable.

There are lots of multi-channel devices out there. None of them
have those problems. Why do you insist in free-text names instead of
using, say, "reg" to distinguish the channels ?

Guenter

>>
>>> +
>>> +  resets:
>>> +    maxItems: 1
>>> +
>>> +  '#thermal-sensor-cells':
>>> +    const: 0
>>> +
>>> +required:
>>> +  - compatible
>>> +  - reg
>>> +  - clocks
>>> +  - interrupts
>>> +  - label
>>> +  - resets
>>> +
>>> +unevaluatedProperties: false
>>> +
>>> +examples:
>>> +  - |
>>> +    pvt@50b00000 {
>>
>>
>> Node names should be generic. See also an explanation and list of
>> examples (not exhaustive) in DT specification:
>> https://devicetree-specification.readthedocs.io/en/latest/chapter2-devicetree-basics.html#generic-names-recommendation
>> If you cannot find a name matching your device, please check in kernel
>> sources for similar cases or you can grow the spec (via pull request to
>> DT spec repo).
> 
> I will update the example node name from "pvt@..." to the generic
> "sensor@...". Is this acceptable?
> 
> Best regards,
> Huan He