[PATCH] dt-bindings: i2c: snps,designware-i2c: describe Renesas RZ/N1D variant

[PATCH] dt-bindings: i2c: snps,designware-i2c: describe Renesas RZ/N1D variant

[Wolfram Sang]

So far, no differences are known, so it can fallback to the default
compatible.

Signed-off-by: Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@sang-engineering.com>
---

If everyone is OK with this patch, does anyone mind if I shortcut it
into the v6.15 mergewindow? It is just a documentation update and would
simplify upstreaming the I2C chain for this board. One dependency less.

 .../devicetree/bindings/i2c/snps,designware-i2c.yaml         | 5 +++++
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)

diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/snps,designware-i2c.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/snps,designware-i2c.yaml
index e5d05263c45a..87eea87bdd52 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/snps,designware-i2c.yaml
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/snps,designware-i2c.yaml
@@ -27,6 +27,11 @@ properties:
     oneOf:
       - description: Generic Synopsys DesignWare I2C controller
         const: snps,designware-i2c
+      - description: Renesas RZ/N1D I2C controller
+        items:
+          - const: renesas,r9a06g032-i2c
+          - const: renesas,rzn1-i2c
+          - const: snps,designware-i2c
       - description: Microsemi Ocelot SoCs I2C controller
         items:
           - const: mscc,ocelot-i2c
-- 
2.47.2

Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: i2c: snps,designware-i2c: describe Renesas RZ/N1D variant

[Conor Dooley]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1490 bytes --]

On Wed, Mar 26, 2025 at 09:59:12AM +0100, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> So far, no differences are known, so it can fallback to the default
> compatible.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@sang-engineering.com>
> ---
> 
> If everyone is OK with this patch, does anyone mind if I shortcut it
> into the v6.15 mergewindow? It is just a documentation update and would
> simplify upstreaming the I2C chain for this board. One dependency less.
> 
>  .../devicetree/bindings/i2c/snps,designware-i2c.yaml         | 5 +++++
>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/snps,designware-i2c.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/snps,designware-i2c.yaml
> index e5d05263c45a..87eea87bdd52 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/snps,designware-i2c.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/snps,designware-i2c.yaml
> @@ -27,6 +27,11 @@ properties:
>      oneOf:
>        - description: Generic Synopsys DesignWare I2C controller
>          const: snps,designware-i2c
> +      - description: Renesas RZ/N1D I2C controller
> +        items:
> +          - const: renesas,r9a06g032-i2c
> +          - const: renesas,rzn1-i2c

I don't really understand the rzn1/r9a06g032 difference here. Why are
both needed?

> +          - const: snps,designware-i2c
>        - description: Microsemi Ocelot SoCs I2C controller
>          items:
>            - const: mscc,ocelot-i2c
> -- 
> 2.47.2
> 

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

Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: i2c: snps,designware-i2c: describe Renesas RZ/N1D variant

[Wolfram Sang]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 561 bytes --]


> > +          - const: renesas,r9a06g032-i2c
> > +          - const: renesas,rzn1-i2c
> 
> I don't really understand the rzn1/r9a06g032 difference here. Why are
> both needed?

From our experience with Renesas R-Car, we concluded to have a binding
for the SoC and one for the family it belongs to.

For example, the already upstream watchdog bindings:

      - items:
          - enum:
              - renesas,r9a06g032-wdt    # RZ/N1D
          - const: renesas,rzn1-wdt      # RZ/N1

I could add the comments here as well if that helps?


[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: i2c: snps,designware-i2c: describe Renesas RZ/N1D variant

[Conor Dooley]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 805 bytes --]

On Wed, Mar 26, 2025 at 10:37:01PM +0100, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> 
> > > +          - const: renesas,r9a06g032-i2c
> > > +          - const: renesas,rzn1-i2c
> > 
> > I don't really understand the rzn1/r9a06g032 difference here. Why are
> > both needed?
> 
> From our experience with Renesas R-Car, we concluded to have a binding
> for the SoC and one for the family it belongs to.
> 
> For example, the already upstream watchdog bindings:
> 
>       - items:
>           - enum:
>               - renesas,r9a06g032-wdt    # RZ/N1D
>           - const: renesas,rzn1-wdt      # RZ/N1
> 
> I could add the comments here as well if that helps?

I think that would be helpful, to explain the relationship between the
devices. With it
Acked-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>


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