[PATCH] dt-bindings: arm: socionext: add bindings for the Synquacer platform

[PATCH] dt-bindings: arm: socionext: add bindings for the Synquacer platform

[jaswinder.singh]

From: Jassi Brar <jaswinder.singh@linaro.org>

Socionext's DeveloperBox is based on the SC2A11B SoC (Synquacer).
Specify bindings for the platform and boards based on that.

Signed-off-by: Jassi Brar <jaswinder.singh@linaro.org>
---
 .../bindings/arm/socionext/synquacer.yaml     | 28 +++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 28 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/socionext/synquacer.yaml

diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/socionext/synquacer.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/socionext/synquacer.yaml
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..72554a4f1c92
--- /dev/null
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/socionext/synquacer.yaml
@@ -0,0 +1,28 @@
+# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause
+%YAML 1.2
+---
+$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/arm/socionext/synquacer.yaml#
+$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml#
+
+title: Socionext Synquacer platform
+
+maintainers:
+  - Masahisa Kojima <masahisa.kojima@linaro.org>
+  - Jassi Brar <jaswinder.singh@linaro.org>
+
+description:
+  Socionext SC2A11B (Synquacer) SoC based boards
+
+properties:
+  $nodename:
+    const: '/'
+  compatible:
+    oneOf:
+      - items:
+          - enum:
+              - socionext,developer-box
+          - const: socionext,synquacer
+
+additionalProperties: true
+
+...
-- 
2.34.1

Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: arm: socionext: add bindings for the Synquacer platform

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 16/06/2023 05:58, jaswinder.singh@linaro.org wrote:
> From: Jassi Brar <jaswinder.singh@linaro.org>
> 
> Socionext's DeveloperBox is based on the SC2A11B SoC (Synquacer).
> Specify bindings for the platform and boards based on that.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jassi Brar <jaswinder.singh@linaro.org>
> ---
>  .../bindings/arm/socionext/synquacer.yaml     | 28 +++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 28 insertions(+)
>  create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/socionext/synquacer.yaml
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/socionext/synquacer.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/socionext/synquacer.yaml
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000000..72554a4f1c92
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/socionext/synquacer.yaml
> @@ -0,0 +1,28 @@
> +# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause
> +%YAML 1.2
> +---
> +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/arm/socionext/synquacer.yaml#
> +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml#
> +
> +title: Socionext Synquacer platform
> +
> +maintainers:
> +  - Masahisa Kojima <masahisa.kojima@linaro.org>
> +  - Jassi Brar <jaswinder.singh@linaro.org>
> +
> +description:
> +  Socionext SC2A11B (Synquacer) SoC based boards
> +
> +properties:
> +  $nodename:
> +    const: '/'
> +  compatible:
> +    oneOf:
> +      - items:
> +          - enum:
> +              - socionext,developer-box
> +          - const: socionext,synquacer

Last compatible looks very generic. Too generic. Are you sure it
uniquely identifies one specific SoC (not family, not generation, not
series)?

Best regards,
Krzysztof

Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: arm: socionext: add bindings for the Synquacer platform

[Jassi Brar]

On Fri, 16 Jun 2023 at 05:15, Krzysztof Kozlowski
<krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote:
>
> On 16/06/2023 05:58, jaswinder.singh@linaro.org wrote:
> > From: Jassi Brar <jaswinder.singh@linaro.org>
> >
> > Socionext's DeveloperBox is based on the SC2A11B SoC (Synquacer).
> > Specify bindings for the platform and boards based on that.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jassi Brar <jaswinder.singh@linaro.org>
> > ---
> >  .../bindings/arm/socionext/synquacer.yaml     | 28 +++++++++++++++++++
> >  1 file changed, 28 insertions(+)
> >  create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/socionext/synquacer.yaml
> >
> > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/socionext/synquacer.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/socionext/synquacer.yaml
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 000000000000..72554a4f1c92
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/socionext/synquacer.yaml
> > @@ -0,0 +1,28 @@
> > +# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause
> > +%YAML 1.2
> > +---
> > +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/arm/socionext/synquacer.yaml#
> > +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml#
> > +
> > +title: Socionext Synquacer platform
> > +
> > +maintainers:
> > +  - Masahisa Kojima <masahisa.kojima@linaro.org>
> > +  - Jassi Brar <jaswinder.singh@linaro.org>
> > +
> > +description:
> > +  Socionext SC2A11B (Synquacer) SoC based boards
> > +
> > +properties:
> > +  $nodename:
> > +    const: '/'
> > +  compatible:
> > +    oneOf:
> > +      - items:
> > +          - enum:
> > +              - socionext,developer-box
> > +          - const: socionext,synquacer
>
> Last compatible looks very generic. Too generic. Are you sure it
> uniquely identifies one specific SoC (not family, not generation, not
> series)?
>
Yeah it does sound generic, but Synquacer and SC2A11B are
interchangeably used in s/w. And the dts in u-boot use this.
Kojima-san may have the final opinion.

thanks.

Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: arm: socionext: add bindings for the Synquacer platform

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 16/06/2023 05:58, jaswinder.singh@linaro.org wrote:
> From: Jassi Brar <jaswinder.singh@linaro.org>
> 
> Socionext's DeveloperBox is based on the SC2A11B SoC (Synquacer).
> Specify bindings for the platform and boards based on that.

A nit, subject: drop second/last, redundant "bindings". The
"dt-bindings" prefix is already stating that these are bindings.

> 

Binding without it's user is usually useless. Where is the user?

Best regards,
Krzysztof

Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: arm: socionext: add bindings for the Synquacer platform

[Jassi Brar]

On Fri, 16 Jun 2023 at 05:15, Krzysztof Kozlowski
<krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote:
>
> On 16/06/2023 05:58, jaswinder.singh@linaro.org wrote:
> > From: Jassi Brar <jaswinder.singh@linaro.org>
> >
> > Socionext's DeveloperBox is based on the SC2A11B SoC (Synquacer).
> > Specify bindings for the platform and boards based on that.
>
> A nit, subject: drop second/last, redundant "bindings". The
> "dt-bindings" prefix is already stating that these are bindings.
>
I can remove it, but I see many mentions like "Fix bindings for"  "Add
binding for" etc in the subject line.

>
> Binding without it's user is usually useless. Where is the user?
>
It is required for SystemReady-2.0 certification.

thanks

Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: arm: socionext: add bindings for the Synquacer platform

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 16/06/2023 18:23, Jassi Brar wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Jun 2023 at 05:15, Krzysztof Kozlowski
> <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote:
>>
>> On 16/06/2023 05:58, jaswinder.singh@linaro.org wrote:
>>> From: Jassi Brar <jaswinder.singh@linaro.org>
>>>
>>> Socionext's DeveloperBox is based on the SC2A11B SoC (Synquacer).
>>> Specify bindings for the platform and boards based on that.
>>
>> A nit, subject: drop second/last, redundant "bindings". The
>> "dt-bindings" prefix is already stating that these are bindings.
>>
> I can remove it, but I see many mentions like "Fix bindings for"  "Add
> binding for" etc in the subject line.

Can we fix them as well?


> 
>>
>> Binding without it's user is usually useless. Where is the user?
>>
> It is required for SystemReady-2.0 certification.

For what? If there is no user, it is not required for SR. We don't
document compatibles for something which does not exist in the projects.


Best regards,
Krzysztof

Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: arm: socionext: add bindings for the Synquacer platform

[Jassi Brar]

On Fri, 16 Jun 2023 at 11:47, Krzysztof Kozlowski
<krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote:
>
> On 16/06/2023 18:23, Jassi Brar wrote:
> > On Fri, 16 Jun 2023 at 05:15, Krzysztof Kozlowski
> > <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> On 16/06/2023 05:58, jaswinder.singh@linaro.org wrote:
> >>> From: Jassi Brar <jaswinder.singh@linaro.org>
> >>>
> >>> Socionext's DeveloperBox is based on the SC2A11B SoC (Synquacer).
> >>> Specify bindings for the platform and boards based on that.
> >>
> >> A nit, subject: drop second/last, redundant "bindings". The
> >> "dt-bindings" prefix is already stating that these are bindings.
> >>
> > I can remove it, but I see many mentions like "Fix bindings for"  "Add
> > binding for" etc in the subject line.
>
> Can we fix them as well?
>
??


> >
> >>
> >> Binding without it's user is usually useless. Where is the user?
> >>
> > It is required for SystemReady-2.0 certification.
>
> For what? If there is no user, it is not required for SR. We don't
> document compatibles for something which does not exist in the projects.
>
The dts/dtsi for synquacer will be added later.
I am sure you are aware that there are countless bindings without
actual use in any dts/dtsi. When exactly did it become mandatory to
have dts/dtsi for the bindings to be merged upstream?

-j

Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: arm: socionext: add bindings for the Synquacer platform

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 16/06/2023 22:06, Jassi Brar wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Jun 2023 at 11:47, Krzysztof Kozlowski
> <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote:
>>
>> On 16/06/2023 18:23, Jassi Brar wrote:
>>> On Fri, 16 Jun 2023 at 05:15, Krzysztof Kozlowski
>>> <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 16/06/2023 05:58, jaswinder.singh@linaro.org wrote:
>>>>> From: Jassi Brar <jaswinder.singh@linaro.org>
>>>>>
>>>>> Socionext's DeveloperBox is based on the SC2A11B SoC (Synquacer).
>>>>> Specify bindings for the platform and boards based on that.
>>>>
>>>> A nit, subject: drop second/last, redundant "bindings". The
>>>> "dt-bindings" prefix is already stating that these are bindings.
>>>>
>>> I can remove it, but I see many mentions like "Fix bindings for"  "Add
>>> binding for" etc in the subject line.
>>
>> Can we fix them as well?
>>
> ??

What else I can say to such argument?

> 
> 
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Binding without it's user is usually useless. Where is the user?
>>>>
>>> It is required for SystemReady-2.0 certification.
>>
>> For what? If there is no user, it is not required for SR. We don't
>> document compatibles for something which does not exist in the projects.
>>
> The dts/dtsi for synquacer will be added later.
> I am sure you are aware that there are countless bindings without
> actual use in any dts/dtsi.

Bindings without user (so no DTSI and no driver)? Just few, not countless.

> When exactly did it become mandatory to
> have dts/dtsi for the bindings to be merged upstream?

It was always. We do not want/need to document downstream stuff or
anything  just because it is somewhere there.

Best regards,
Krzysztof

Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: arm: socionext: add bindings for the Synquacer platform

[Jassi Brar]

On Fri, 16 Jun 2023 at 15:34, Krzysztof Kozlowski
<krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote:
>
> On 16/06/2023 22:06, Jassi Brar wrote:
> > On Fri, 16 Jun 2023 at 11:47, Krzysztof Kozlowski
> > <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> On 16/06/2023 18:23, Jassi Brar wrote:
> >>> On Fri, 16 Jun 2023 at 05:15, Krzysztof Kozlowski
> >>> <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> On 16/06/2023 05:58, jaswinder.singh@linaro.org wrote:
> >>>>> From: Jassi Brar <jaswinder.singh@linaro.org>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Socionext's DeveloperBox is based on the SC2A11B SoC (Synquacer).
> >>>>> Specify bindings for the platform and boards based on that.
> >>>>
> >>>> A nit, subject: drop second/last, redundant "bindings". The
> >>>> "dt-bindings" prefix is already stating that these are bindings.
> >>>>
> >>> I can remove it, but I see many mentions like "Fix bindings for"  "Add
> >>> binding for" etc in the subject line.
> >>
> >> Can we fix them as well?
> >>
> > ??
> What else I can say to such argument?
>
It was not an argument, I agreed to remove it. I just observed that
the nit-pick was arbitrary.
And frankly
   "dt-bindings: arm: socionext: add Synquacer"   is as misleading as
   "dt-bindings: arm: socionext: add bindings for the Synquacer"   is improper.


> >>>>
> >>>> Binding without it's user is usually useless. Where is the user?
> >>>>
> >>> It is required for SystemReady-2.0 certification.
> >>
> >> For what? If there is no user, it is not required for SR. We don't
> >> document compatibles for something which does not exist in the projects.
> >>
> > The dts/dtsi for synquacer will be added later.
> > I am sure you are aware that there are countless bindings without
> > actual use in any dts/dtsi.
>
> Bindings without user (so no DTSI and no driver)? Just few, not countless.
>
I disagree. But I don't have time to write a script to find
compatibles/enums and properties in yaml/txt files that are not in any
dts/dtsi file.
 By that logic synquacer's spi/netsec/i2c/exiu bindings and drivers in
kernel are illegit too?

Also the user may not be in Linux, but we keep "os-agnostic" bindings in Linux.
The synquacer dts/dtsi are in u-boot upstream. SR testsuite looks up
the underlying platform name and checks if the bindings are merged
upstream.
While I am not against also submitting dts/dtsi in linux, I don't
think the binding should be held at ransom.

> > When exactly did it become mandatory to
> > have dts/dtsi for the bindings to be merged upstream?
>
> It was always. We do not want/need to document downstream stuff or
> anything  just because it is somewhere there.
>
I am not asking you to merge an obscure internal revision of some SoC.
Synquacer is a public development platform and a "96board" already
certified for SR-1.0.

thnx.

Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: arm: socionext: add bindings for the Synquacer platform

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 17/06/2023 01:18, Jassi Brar wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Jun 2023 at 15:34, Krzysztof Kozlowski
> <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote:
>>
>> On 16/06/2023 22:06, Jassi Brar wrote:
>>> On Fri, 16 Jun 2023 at 11:47, Krzysztof Kozlowski
>>> <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 16/06/2023 18:23, Jassi Brar wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, 16 Jun 2023 at 05:15, Krzysztof Kozlowski
>>>>> <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 16/06/2023 05:58, jaswinder.singh@linaro.org wrote:
>>>>>>> From: Jassi Brar <jaswinder.singh@linaro.org>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Socionext's DeveloperBox is based on the SC2A11B SoC (Synquacer).
>>>>>>> Specify bindings for the platform and boards based on that.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> A nit, subject: drop second/last, redundant "bindings". The
>>>>>> "dt-bindings" prefix is already stating that these are bindings.
>>>>>>
>>>>> I can remove it, but I see many mentions like "Fix bindings for"  "Add
>>>>> binding for" etc in the subject line.
>>>>
>>>> Can we fix them as well?
>>>>
>>> ??
>> What else I can say to such argument?
>>
> It was not an argument, I agreed to remove it. I just observed that
> the nit-pick was arbitrary.
> And frankly
>    "dt-bindings: arm: socionext: add Synquacer"   is as misleading as
>    "dt-bindings: arm: socionext: add bindings for the Synquacer"   is improper.

"add Synquacer boards"
it is both precise and correct. No misleading.


> 
> 
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Binding without it's user is usually useless. Where is the user?
>>>>>>
>>>>> It is required for SystemReady-2.0 certification.
>>>>
>>>> For what? If there is no user, it is not required for SR. We don't
>>>> document compatibles for something which does not exist in the projects.
>>>>
>>> The dts/dtsi for synquacer will be added later.
>>> I am sure you are aware that there are countless bindings without
>>> actual use in any dts/dtsi.
>>
>> Bindings without user (so no DTSI and no driver)? Just few, not countless.
>>
> I disagree. But I don't have time to write a script to find
> compatibles/enums and properties in yaml/txt files that are not in any
> dts/dtsi file.
>  By that logic synquacer's spi/netsec/i2c/exiu bindings and drivers in
> kernel are illegit too?

Don't know which one you talk about.

> 
> Also the user may not be in Linux, but we keep "os-agnostic" bindings in Linux.

I did not say anything about Linux here. Look:

"does not exist in the projects."

> The synquacer dts/dtsi are in u-boot upstream. SR testsuite looks up

Sure, can you point it? U-Boot upstream is a valid project. Just like
many other upstream ones.

> the underlying platform name and checks if the bindings are merged
> upstream.
> While I am not against also submitting dts/dtsi in linux, I don't
> think the binding should be held at ransom.
> 
>>> When exactly did it become mandatory to
>>> have dts/dtsi for the bindings to be merged upstream?
>>
>> It was always. We do not want/need to document downstream stuff or
>> anything  just because it is somewhere there.
>>
> I am not asking you to merge an obscure internal revision of some SoC.
> Synquacer is a public development platform and a "96board" already
> certified for SR-1.0.

Without any reference to any project using this, it looks like you are.
Sorry.

Best regards,
Krzysztof

Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: arm: socionext: add bindings for the Synquacer platform

[Jassi Brar]

On Sat, 17 Jun 2023 at 02:18, Krzysztof Kozlowski
<krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote:
>
> On 17/06/2023 01:18, Jassi Brar wrote:
> > On Fri, 16 Jun 2023 at 15:34, Krzysztof Kozlowski
> > <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> On 16/06/2023 22:06, Jassi Brar wrote:
> >>> On Fri, 16 Jun 2023 at 11:47, Krzysztof Kozlowski
> >>> <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> On 16/06/2023 18:23, Jassi Brar wrote:
> >>>>> On Fri, 16 Jun 2023 at 05:15, Krzysztof Kozlowski
> >>>>> <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On 16/06/2023 05:58, jaswinder.singh@linaro.org wrote:
> >>>>>>> From: Jassi Brar <jaswinder.singh@linaro.org>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Socionext's DeveloperBox is based on the SC2A11B SoC (Synquacer).
> >>>>>>> Specify bindings for the platform and boards based on that.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> A nit, subject: drop second/last, redundant "bindings". The
> >>>>>> "dt-bindings" prefix is already stating that these are bindings.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>> I can remove it, but I see many mentions like "Fix bindings for"  "Add
> >>>>> binding for" etc in the subject line.
> >>>>
> >>>> Can we fix them as well?
> >>>>
> >>> ??
> >> What else I can say to such argument?
> >>
> > It was not an argument, I agreed to remove it. I just observed that
> > the nit-pick was arbitrary.
> > And frankly
> >    "dt-bindings: arm: socionext: add Synquacer"   is as misleading as
> >    "dt-bindings: arm: socionext: add bindings for the Synquacer"   is improper.
>
> "add Synquacer boards"
> it is both precise and correct. No misleading.
>
Ok. I am going to do that. Are you going to enforce this practice for
all submissions in future?


> >>
> >> Bindings without user (so no DTSI and no driver)? Just few, not countless.
> >>
> > I disagree. But I don't have time to write a script to find
> > compatibles/enums and properties in yaml/txt files that are not in any
> > dts/dtsi file.
> >  By that logic synquacer's spi/netsec/i2c/exiu bindings and drivers in
> > kernel are illegit too?
>
> Don't know which one you talk about.
>
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/
  {
     i2c/socionext,synquacer-i2c.yaml
     interrupt-controller/socionext,synquacer-exiu.yaml
     net/socionext,synquacer-netsec.yaml
     spi/socionext,synquacer-spi.yaml
   }
and corresponding code in drivers/


> > The synquacer dts/dtsi are in u-boot upstream. SR testsuite looks up
>
> Sure, can you point it? U-Boot upstream is a valid project. Just like
> many other upstream ones.
>
Location of dts/dtsi in u-boot upstream is
     https://elixir.bootlin.com/u-boot/latest/source/arch/arm/dts
see { synquacer-sc2a11-caches.dtsi     synquacer-sc2a11.dtsi
synquacer-sc2a11-developerbox-u-boot.dtsi
synquacer-sc2a11-developerbox.dts }

regards.

Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: arm: socionext: add bindings for the Synquacer platform

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 19/06/2023 21:17, Jassi Brar wrote:
>>>>>> Can we fix them as well?
>>>>>>
>>>>> ??
>>>> What else I can say to such argument?
>>>>
>>> It was not an argument, I agreed to remove it. I just observed that
>>> the nit-pick was arbitrary.
>>> And frankly
>>>    "dt-bindings: arm: socionext: add Synquacer"   is as misleading as
>>>    "dt-bindings: arm: socionext: add bindings for the Synquacer"   is improper.
>>
>> "add Synquacer boards"
>> it is both precise and correct. No misleading.
>>
> Ok. I am going to do that. Are you going to enforce this practice for
> all submissions in future?

How many cases can you find that I did not enforce it? That I provided a
review and accepted other subject? It's nothing new...

> 
> 
>>>>
>>>> Bindings without user (so no DTSI and no driver)? Just few, not countless.
>>>>
>>> I disagree. But I don't have time to write a script to find
>>> compatibles/enums and properties in yaml/txt files that are not in any
>>> dts/dtsi file.
>>>  By that logic synquacer's spi/netsec/i2c/exiu bindings and drivers in
>>> kernel are illegit too?
>>
>> Don't know which one you talk about.
>>
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/
>   {
>      i2c/socionext,synquacer-i2c.yaml

There is a user. What do you want to prove with this one?

>      interrupt-controller/socionext,synquacer-exiu.yaml
>      net/socionext,synquacer-netsec.yaml
>      spi/socionext,synquacer-spi.yaml
>    }
> and corresponding code in drivers/
> 
> 
>>> The synquacer dts/dtsi are in u-boot upstream. SR testsuite looks up
>>
>> Sure, can you point it? U-Boot upstream is a valid project. Just like
>> many other upstream ones.
>>
> Location of dts/dtsi in u-boot upstream is
>      https://elixir.bootlin.com/u-boot/latest/source/arch/arm/dts


Acked-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>

Best regards,
Krzysztof

Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: arm: socionext: add bindings for the Synquacer platform

[Rob Herring]

On Thu, Jun 15, 2023 at 10:58:13PM -0500, jaswinder.singh@linaro.org wrote:
> From: Jassi Brar <jaswinder.singh@linaro.org>
> 
> Socionext's DeveloperBox is based on the SC2A11B SoC (Synquacer).
> Specify bindings for the platform and boards based on that.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jassi Brar <jaswinder.singh@linaro.org>
> ---
>  .../bindings/arm/socionext/synquacer.yaml     | 28 +++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 28 insertions(+)
>  create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/socionext/synquacer.yaml

Should I pick this up or Socionext maintainers will?

Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: arm: socionext: add bindings for the Synquacer platform

[Jassi Brar]

On Tue, 20 Jun 2023 at 11:50, Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jun 15, 2023 at 10:58:13PM -0500, jaswinder.singh@linaro.org wrote:
> > From: Jassi Brar <jaswinder.singh@linaro.org>
> >
> > Socionext's DeveloperBox is based on the SC2A11B SoC (Synquacer).
> > Specify bindings for the platform and boards based on that.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jassi Brar <jaswinder.singh@linaro.org>
> > ---
> >  .../bindings/arm/socionext/synquacer.yaml     | 28 +++++++++++++++++++
> >  1 file changed, 28 insertions(+)
> >  create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/socionext/synquacer.yaml
>
> Should I pick this up or Socionext maintainers will?
>
Please consider Patch-v2 that changes the subject line and specifies
the SoC compatible 'sc2a11b' (Synquacer is the brand name).

Thanks

-jassi

[PATCHv2] dt-bindings: arm: socionext: add Synquacer platforms

[jaswinder.singh]

From: Jassi Brar <jaswinder.singh@linaro.org>

Socionext's DeveloperBox is based on the SC2A11B SoC (Synquacer).
Specify bindings for the platform and boards based on that.

Signed-off-by: Jassi Brar <jaswinder.singh@linaro.org>
---
 .../bindings/arm/socionext/synquacer.yaml     | 29 +++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 29 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/socionext/synquacer.yaml

diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/socionext/synquacer.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/socionext/synquacer.yaml
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..c582d9c31213
--- /dev/null
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/socionext/synquacer.yaml
@@ -0,0 +1,29 @@
+# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause
+%YAML 1.2
+---
+$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/arm/socionext/synquacer.yaml#
+$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml#
+
+title: Socionext Synquacer platform
+
+maintainers:
+  - Masahisa Kojima <masahisa.kojima@linaro.org>
+  - Jassi Brar <jaswinder.singh@linaro.org>
+
+description:
+  Socionext SC2A11B (Synquacer) SoC based boards
+
+properties:
+  $nodename:
+    const: '/'
+  compatible:
+    oneOf:
+      - items:
+          - enum:
+              - socionext,developer-box
+              - socionext,synquacer
+          - const: socionext,sc2a11b
+
+additionalProperties: true
+
+...
-- 
2.34.1

Re: [PATCHv2] dt-bindings: arm: socionext: add Synquacer platforms

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 20/06/2023 19:07, jaswinder.singh@linaro.org wrote:
> From: Jassi Brar <jaswinder.singh@linaro.org>
> 
> Socionext's DeveloperBox is based on the SC2A11B SoC (Synquacer).
> Specify bindings for the platform and boards based on that.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jassi Brar <jaswinder.singh@linaro.org>
> ---

Attach changelog after ---.

>  .../bindings/arm/socionext/synquacer.yaml     | 29 +++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 29 insertions(+)
>  create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/socionext/synquacer.yaml
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/socionext/synquacer.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/socionext/synquacer.yaml
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000000..c582d9c31213
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/socionext/synquacer.yaml
> @@ -0,0 +1,29 @@
> +# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause
> +%YAML 1.2
> +---
> +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/arm/socionext/synquacer.yaml#
> +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml#
> +
> +title: Socionext Synquacer platform
> +
> +maintainers:
> +  - Masahisa Kojima <masahisa.kojima@linaro.org>
> +  - Jassi Brar <jaswinder.singh@linaro.org>
> +
> +description:
> +  Socionext SC2A11B (Synquacer) SoC based boards
> +
> +properties:
> +  $nodename:
> +    const: '/'
> +  compatible:
> +    oneOf:
> +      - items:
> +          - enum:
> +              - socionext,developer-box
> +              - socionext,synquacer
> +          - const: socionext,sc2a11b

That's quite different change. What is synquacer in this case? You claim
now it is a board, but based on previous discussions and U-Boot source
it does not look like such. What's more, it does not match U-Boot
sources and there is no Linux user of this, so it contradicts points of
our previous discussion.


Best regards,
Krzysztof

Re: [PATCHv2] dt-bindings: arm: socionext: add Synquacer platforms

[Jassi Brar]

On Tue, 20 Jun 2023 at 12:16, Krzysztof Kozlowski
<krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote:
>
> On 20/06/2023 19:07, jaswinder.singh@linaro.org wrote:
> > From: Jassi Brar <jaswinder.singh@linaro.org>
> >
> > Socionext's DeveloperBox is based on the SC2A11B SoC (Synquacer).
> > Specify bindings for the platform and boards based on that.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jassi Brar <jaswinder.singh@linaro.org>
> > ---
>
> Attach changelog after ---.
>
> >  .../bindings/arm/socionext/synquacer.yaml     | 29 +++++++++++++++++++
> >  1 file changed, 29 insertions(+)
> >  create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/socionext/synquacer.yaml
> >
> > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/socionext/synquacer.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/socionext/synquacer.yaml
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 000000000000..c582d9c31213
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/socionext/synquacer.yaml
> > @@ -0,0 +1,29 @@
> > +# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause
> > +%YAML 1.2
> > +---
> > +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/arm/socionext/synquacer.yaml#
> > +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml#
> > +
> > +title: Socionext Synquacer platform
> > +
> > +maintainers:
> > +  - Masahisa Kojima <masahisa.kojima@linaro.org>
> > +  - Jassi Brar <jaswinder.singh@linaro.org>
> > +
> > +description:
> > +  Socionext SC2A11B (Synquacer) SoC based boards
> > +
> > +properties:
> > +  $nodename:
> > +    const: '/'
> > +  compatible:
> > +    oneOf:
> > +      - items:
> > +          - enum:
> > +              - socionext,developer-box
> > +              - socionext,synquacer
> > +          - const: socionext,sc2a11b
>
> That's quite different change.
>
So it is not carrying your ack.

> What is synquacer in this case? You claim
> now it is a board, but based on previous discussions and U-Boot source
> it does not look like such.
>
I never made that claim. I said Kojima-san will confirm. He informed
Synquacer is a brand name.

Currently no code internally or externally differentiates between
SC2A11B and Synquacer and we might as well keep living with Synquacer
only. This patch is an attempt to be accurate.

-j

Re: [PATCHv2] dt-bindings: arm: socionext: add Synquacer platforms

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 20/06/2023 19:24, Jassi Brar wrote:
>>> +properties:
>>> +  $nodename:
>>> +    const: '/'
>>> +  compatible:
>>> +    oneOf:
>>> +      - items:
>>> +          - enum:
>>> +              - socionext,developer-box
>>> +              - socionext,synquacer
>>> +          - const: socionext,sc2a11b
>>
>> That's quite different change.
>>
> So it is not carrying your ack.
> 
>> What is synquacer in this case? You claim
>> now it is a board, but based on previous discussions and U-Boot source
>> it does not look like such.
>>
> I never made that claim. I said Kojima-san will confirm. He informed
> Synquacer is a brand name.
> 
> Currently no code internally or externally differentiates between
> SC2A11B and Synquacer and we might as well keep living with Synquacer
> only. This patch is an attempt to be accurate.

Then the patch is not correct, because synquacer is not a board. We
should anyway choose only one for adding to documentation.

Best regards,
Krzysztof

Re: [PATCHv2] dt-bindings: arm: socionext: add Synquacer platforms

[Jassi Brar]

On Tue, 20 Jun 2023 at 12:54, Krzysztof Kozlowski
<krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote:
>
> On 20/06/2023 19:24, Jassi Brar wrote:
> >>> +properties:
> >>> +  $nodename:
> >>> +    const: '/'
> >>> +  compatible:
> >>> +    oneOf:
> >>> +      - items:
> >>> +          - enum:
> >>> +              - socionext,developer-box
> >>> +              - socionext,synquacer
> >>> +          - const: socionext,sc2a11b
> >>
> >> That's quite different change.
> >>
> > So it is not carrying your ack.
> >
> >> What is synquacer in this case? You claim
> >> now it is a board, but based on previous discussions and U-Boot source
> >> it does not look like such.
> >>
> > I never made that claim. I said Kojima-san will confirm. He informed
> > Synquacer is a brand name.
> >
> > Currently no code internally or externally differentiates between
> > SC2A11B and Synquacer and we might as well keep living with Synquacer
> > only. This patch is an attempt to be accurate.
>
> Then the patch is not correct, because synquacer is not a board. We
> should anyway choose only one for adding to documentation.
>
OK. I will revert to using the brand name Synquacer.

thnkx

[PATCHv3] dt-bindings: arm: socionext: add Synquacer platforms

[jaswinder.singh]

From: Jassi Brar <jaswinder.singh@linaro.org>

Socionext's DeveloperBox is based on the SC2A11B SoC (Synquacer).
Specify bindings for the platform and boards based on that.

Signed-off-by: Jassi Brar <jaswinder.singh@linaro.org>
---

 * Revert back to using the brand name Synquacer instead of sc2a11b

 .../bindings/arm/socionext/synquacer.yaml     | 28 +++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 28 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/socionext/synquacer.yaml

diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/socionext/synquacer.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/socionext/synquacer.yaml
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..72554a4f1c92
--- /dev/null
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/socionext/synquacer.yaml
@@ -0,0 +1,28 @@
+# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause
+%YAML 1.2
+---
+$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/arm/socionext/synquacer.yaml#
+$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml#
+
+title: Socionext Synquacer platform
+
+maintainers:
+  - Masahisa Kojima <masahisa.kojima@linaro.org>
+  - Jassi Brar <jaswinder.singh@linaro.org>
+
+description:
+  Socionext SC2A11B (Synquacer) SoC based boards
+
+properties:
+  $nodename:
+    const: '/'
+  compatible:
+    oneOf:
+      - items:
+          - enum:
+              - socionext,developer-box
+          - const: socionext,synquacer
+
+additionalProperties: true
+
+...
-- 
2.34.1

Re: [PATCHv3] dt-bindings: arm: socionext: add Synquacer platforms

[Rob Herring]

On Wed, 21 Jun 2023 10:36:58 -0500, jaswinder.singh@linaro.org wrote:
> From: Jassi Brar <jaswinder.singh@linaro.org>
> 
> Socionext's DeveloperBox is based on the SC2A11B SoC (Synquacer).
> Specify bindings for the platform and boards based on that.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jassi Brar <jaswinder.singh@linaro.org>
> ---
> 
>  * Revert back to using the brand name Synquacer instead of sc2a11b
> 
>  .../bindings/arm/socionext/synquacer.yaml     | 28 +++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 28 insertions(+)
>  create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/socionext/synquacer.yaml
> 

Applied, thanks!