Re: [PATCH v4 01/22] dt-bindings: mux: Remove nodename pattern constraints

[Tommaso Merciai <tommaso.merciai.xr@bp.renesas.com>]

Hi Conor,
Thank you for your review!

On Fri, Nov 21, 2025 at 06:24:03PM +0000, Conor Dooley wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 21, 2025 at 04:11:50PM +0100, Tommaso Merciai wrote:
> > The nodename pattern in  created an unnecessary restriction that forced
> > all mux nodes to be named with the 'mux-controller' prefix.
> > This prevented valid use cases where mux functionality is part of other
> > hardware blocks that should use more specific naming conventions.
> > 
> > Remove the $nodename pattern constraints from both the 'select' keyword
> > and the properties section of the mux-controller schema.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Tommaso Merciai <tommaso.merciai.xr@bp.renesas.com>
> 
> Funnily enough, there's another patch that I saw today that hit this
> same thing:
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/176373269741.263545.10849918874919174841.robh@kernel.org/

:)

> 
> > ---
> > v3->v4:
> >  - New patch.
> > 
> >  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mux/mux-controller.yaml | 6 ------
> >  1 file changed, 6 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mux/mux-controller.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mux/mux-controller.yaml
> > index 78340bbe4df6..6defb9da10f7 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mux/mux-controller.yaml
> > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mux/mux-controller.yaml
> > @@ -63,18 +63,12 @@ description: |
> >  
> >  select:
> >    anyOf:
> > -    - properties:
> > -        $nodename:
> > -          pattern: '^mux-controller'
> >      - required:
> >          - '#mux-control-cells'
> >      - required:
> >          - '#mux-state-cells'
> >  
> 
> >  properties:
> > -  $nodename:
> > -    pattern: '^mux-controller(@.*|-([0-9]|[1-9][0-9]+))?$'
> 
> I need to apologise, I told you to delete the wrong thing in my DM
> earlier. Only deleting this part was actually required, deleting the
> select portion doesn't really do anything for your problem.
> What you've done is probably fine though, since anything actually acting
> as a mux-controller will have the cells properties.

No worries! :)
Thank you for your review/hint!

> 
> Reviewed-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>
> pw-bot: not-applicable
> 
> > -
> >    '#mux-control-cells':
> >      enum: [ 0, 1 ]
> >  
> > -- 
> > 2.43.0
> > 

Thanks & Regards,
Tommaso