[PATCH 0/4] dt-bindings: treewide: don't check node names

[PATCH 0/4] dt-bindings: treewide: don't check node names

[Wolfram Sang]

Node names are already and properly checked by the core schema. No need
to do it again.

These are all occurrences I found in linux-next as of 20251015. I did
run dt_bindings_check successfully. I haven't done a way to run
dtbs_check yet because I would need to identify the proper architecture
first, right? Is there some tool which tests all DTs of a certain
binding? At least build bot is happy, I don't know if it checks DTs as
well, though.

I'd suggest to give subsystems some time to pick these patches before
Rob applies the remaining ones?


Wolfram Sang (4):
  dt-bindings: bus: don't check node names
  dt-bindings: nvmem: don't check node names
  ASoC: dt-bindings: don't check node names
  dt-bindings: spi: don't check node names

 .../devicetree/bindings/bus/allwinner,sun8i-a23-rsb.yaml        | 2 +-
 .../devicetree/bindings/bus/fsl,imx8qxp-pixel-link-msi-bus.yaml | 2 +-
 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/bus/st,stm32-etzpc.yaml       | 2 +-
 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/bus/st,stm32mp25-rifsc.yaml   | 2 +-
 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/nvmem/st,stm32-romem.yaml     | 2 +-
 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sound/qcom,wcd934x.yaml       | 2 +-
 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/snps,dw-apb-ssi.yaml      | 2 +-
 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/spi-controller.yaml       | 2 +-
 8 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

-- 
2.47.2

[PATCH 4/4] dt-bindings: spi: don't check node names

[Wolfram Sang]

Node names are already and properly checked by the core schema. No need
to do it again.

Signed-off-by: Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@sang-engineering.com>
---
I'd suggest to give subsystems some time to pick this patch before
Rob applies it?

 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/snps,dw-apb-ssi.yaml | 2 +-
 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/spi-controller.yaml  | 2 +-
 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/snps,dw-apb-ssi.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/snps,dw-apb-ssi.yaml
index 0543c526b783..5c87fc8a845d 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/snps,dw-apb-ssi.yaml
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/snps,dw-apb-ssi.yaml
@@ -153,7 +153,7 @@ properties:
       provides an interface to override the native DWC SSI CS control.
 
 patternProperties:
-  "^.*@[0-9a-f]+$":
+  "@[0-9a-f]+$":
     type: object
     additionalProperties: true
 
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/spi-controller.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/spi-controller.yaml
index 82d051f7bd6e..3b8e990e30c4 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/spi-controller.yaml
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/spi-controller.yaml
@@ -111,7 +111,7 @@ properties:
       - compatible
 
 patternProperties:
-  "^.*@[0-9a-f]+$":
+  "@[0-9a-f]+$":
     type: object
     $ref: spi-peripheral-props.yaml
     additionalProperties: true
-- 
2.47.2

Re: [PATCH 0/4] dt-bindings: treewide: don't check node names

[Conor Dooley]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 919 bytes --]

On Mon, Oct 20, 2025 at 08:09:49AM +0200, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> Node names are already and properly checked by the core schema. No need
> to do it again.
> 
> These are all occurrences I found in linux-next as of 20251015. I did
> run dt_bindings_check successfully. I haven't done a way to run
> dtbs_check yet because I would need to identify the proper architecture
> first, right? Is there some tool which tests all DTs of a certain
> binding? At least build bot is happy, I don't know if it checks DTs as
> well, though.
> 
> I'd suggest to give subsystems some time to pick these patches before
> Rob applies the remaining ones?
> 
> 
> Wolfram Sang (4):
>   dt-bindings: bus: don't check node names
>   dt-bindings: nvmem: don't check node names
>   ASoC: dt-bindings: don't check node names
>   dt-bindings: spi: don't check node names

Acked-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>

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

Re: (subset) [PATCH 0/4] dt-bindings: treewide: don't check node names

[Mark Brown]

On Mon, 20 Oct 2025 08:09:49 +0200, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> Node names are already and properly checked by the core schema. No need
> to do it again.
> 
> These are all occurrences I found in linux-next as of 20251015. I did
> run dt_bindings_check successfully. I haven't done a way to run
> dtbs_check yet because I would need to identify the proper architecture
> first, right? Is there some tool which tests all DTs of a certain
> binding? At least build bot is happy, I don't know if it checks DTs as
> well, though.
> 
> [...]

Applied to

   https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/broonie/sound.git for-next

Thanks!

[3/4] ASoC: dt-bindings: don't check node names
      commit: 6a4f29bc66294d44d61a294e5bdc623eae74587b

All being well this means that it will be integrated into the linux-next
tree (usually sometime in the next 24 hours) and sent to Linus during
the next merge window (or sooner if it is a bug fix), however if
problems are discovered then the patch may be dropped or reverted.

You may get further e-mails resulting from automated or manual testing
and review of the tree, please engage with people reporting problems and
send followup patches addressing any issues that are reported if needed.

If any updates are required or you are submitting further changes they
should be sent as incremental updates against current git, existing
patches will not be replaced.

Please add any relevant lists and maintainers to the CCs when replying
to this mail.

Thanks,
Mark

Re: (subset) [PATCH 0/4] dt-bindings: treewide: don't check node names

[Mark Brown]

On Mon, 20 Oct 2025 08:09:49 +0200, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> Node names are already and properly checked by the core schema. No need
> to do it again.
> 
> These are all occurrences I found in linux-next as of 20251015. I did
> run dt_bindings_check successfully. I haven't done a way to run
> dtbs_check yet because I would need to identify the proper architecture
> first, right? Is there some tool which tests all DTs of a certain
> binding? At least build bot is happy, I don't know if it checks DTs as
> well, though.
> 
> [...]

Applied to

   https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/broonie/spi.git for-next

Thanks!

[4/4] dt-bindings: spi: don't check node names
      commit: 7c69694cec869e3bf7c810fd94f860253aeb8053

All being well this means that it will be integrated into the linux-next
tree (usually sometime in the next 24 hours) and sent to Linus during
the next merge window (or sooner if it is a bug fix), however if
problems are discovered then the patch may be dropped or reverted.

You may get further e-mails resulting from automated or manual testing
and review of the tree, please engage with people reporting problems and
send followup patches addressing any issues that are reported if needed.

If any updates are required or you are submitting further changes they
should be sent as incremental updates against current git, existing
patches will not be replaced.

Please add any relevant lists and maintainers to the CCs when replying
to this mail.

Thanks,
Mark

Re: (subset) [PATCH 0/4] dt-bindings: treewide: don't check node names

[Srinivas Kandagatla]

On Mon, 20 Oct 2025 08:09:49 +0200, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> Node names are already and properly checked by the core schema. No need
> to do it again.
> 
> These are all occurrences I found in linux-next as of 20251015. I did
> run dt_bindings_check successfully. I haven't done a way to run
> dtbs_check yet because I would need to identify the proper architecture
> first, right? Is there some tool which tests all DTs of a certain
> binding? At least build bot is happy, I don't know if it checks DTs as
> well, though.
> 
> [...]

Applied, thanks!

[2/4] dt-bindings: nvmem: don't check node names
      commit: 65c1bc002b27d1ac398e37ce031a45d59999cb13

Best regards,
-- 
Srinivas Kandagatla <srini@kernel.org>