Re: [PATCH 2/2] ASoC: dt-bindings: microchip,sama7g5-i2smcc: Add 'sound-name-prefix' property

[<Andrei.Simion@microchip.com>]

On 09.09.2024 11:38, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe
> 
> On 09/09/2024 10:35, Andrei Simion wrote:
>> From: Codrin Ciubotariu <codrin.ciubotariu@microchip.com>
>>
>> Add 'sound-name-prefix' property to differentiate between interfaces in
>> DPCM use-cases. Property is optional.
>>
>> [andrei.simion@microchip.com: Adjust the commit title and message.
>> Reword the description for 'sound-name-prefix'.]
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Codrin Ciubotariu <codrin.ciubotariu@microchip.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Andrei Simion <andrei.simion@microchip.com>
>> ---
>>  .../bindings/sound/microchip,sama7g5-i2smcc.yaml           | 7 +++++++
>>  1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sound/microchip,sama7g5-i2smcc.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sound/microchip,sama7g5-i2smcc.yaml
>> index fb630a184350..ad34df67c7c0 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sound/microchip,sama7g5-i2smcc.yaml
>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sound/microchip,sama7g5-i2smcc.yaml
>> @@ -52,6 +52,13 @@ properties:
>>        - const: gclk
>>      minItems: 1
>>
>> +  sound-name-prefix:
>> +    pattern: "^I2SMCC[0-9]$"
> 
> This does not look correct. Name/prefix can be anything matching real
> hardware, why are you restricting it? How can you predict all names?
> 
Based on the datasheet, the SoC(s) have the following naming conventions:
  - sama7g5: I2SMCC0 and I2SMCC1
  - sam9x60/sam9x75: I2SMCC

To accommodate these variations, I propose using a more relaxed pattern: "^I2SMCC(0-9)?$".
This pattern allows for both the fixed prefix and an optional single digit at the end.
What are your thoughts on this approach?


>> +    $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/string
>> +    description:
>> +      Unique prefixes for the sink/source names of the component, ensuring
>> +      distinct identification among multiple instances.
> 
> You are duplicating property definitions. This is not needed at all.
> Maybe your schema misses $ref to common schema.
> 

I understand the concern about duplicating property definitions.
In the current file, I have referenced `dai-common` as shown here:
https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/master/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sound/microchip%2Csama7g5-i2smcc.yaml#L74C1-L75C27

Could you please confirm if this reference is correctly implemented,
or suggest any adjustments needed to align with the common schema?


Best Regards,
Andrei Simion

> 
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof
>