| Message ID | 20220214081916.162014-2-krzysztof.kozlowski@canonical.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Handled Elsewhere |
| Commit | 6b94ee669e8a3c2276cfb92103328d0713d74c3c |
| Headers | show |
| Series | mfd/pwm: dt-bindings: google,cros-ec: include generic pwm schema | expand |
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 09:19:13 +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > Include generic pwm.yaml schema, which enforces PWM node naming. Keep > the old name in bindings as deprecated. > > Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@canonical.com> > --- > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/google,cros-ec.yaml | 4 ++++ > .../devicetree/bindings/pwm/google,cros-ec-pwm.yaml | 5 ++++- > 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > Reviewed-by: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > Include generic pwm.yaml schema, which enforces PWM node naming. Keep > the old name in bindings as deprecated. > > Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@canonical.com> > --- > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/google,cros-ec.yaml | 4 ++++ Acked-by: Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org> > .../devicetree/bindings/pwm/google,cros-ec-pwm.yaml | 5 ++++- > 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
Hi Lee, Am Mittwoch, 23. Februar 2022, 10:16:01 CET schrieb Lee Jones: > On Mon, 14 Feb 2022, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > > > Include generic pwm.yaml schema, which enforces PWM node naming. Keep > > the old name in bindings as deprecated. > > > > Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@canonical.com> > > --- > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/google,cros-ec.yaml | 4 ++++ > > Acked-by: Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org> what is your expectation regarding this patch? Are you planning to merge it or are you expecting this to go through some other tree? The binding-change here is backward-comaptible in that the old node-name is still in it, only marked as deprecated, so in theory this patch should be able to be applied on its own without causing defects. Heiko > > > .../devicetree/bindings/pwm/google,cros-ec-pwm.yaml | 5 ++++- > > 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > >
On Wed, 23 Feb 2022, Heiko Stuebner wrote: > Hi Lee, > > Am Mittwoch, 23. Februar 2022, 10:16:01 CET schrieb Lee Jones: > > On Mon, 14 Feb 2022, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > > > > > Include generic pwm.yaml schema, which enforces PWM node naming. Keep > > > the old name in bindings as deprecated. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@canonical.com> > > > --- > > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/google,cros-ec.yaml | 4 ++++ > > > > Acked-by: Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org> > > what is your expectation regarding this patch? > > Are you planning to merge it or are you expecting this to go through > some other tree? > > The binding-change here is backward-comaptible in that the old > node-name is still in it, only marked as deprecated, so in theory > this patch should be able to be applied on its own without > causing defects. In an ideal world, it would be broken up and I would take the MFD part. Is that possible or are there dependencies? Or, worse still, does the whole set need to be applied at once?
Am Donnerstag, 24. Februar 2022, 11:02:48 CET schrieb Lee Jones: > On Wed, 23 Feb 2022, Heiko Stuebner wrote: > > > Hi Lee, > > > > Am Mittwoch, 23. Februar 2022, 10:16:01 CET schrieb Lee Jones: > > > On Mon, 14 Feb 2022, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > > > > > > > Include generic pwm.yaml schema, which enforces PWM node naming. Keep > > > > the old name in bindings as deprecated. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@canonical.com> > > > > --- > > > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/google,cros-ec.yaml | 4 ++++ > > > > > > Acked-by: Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org> > > > > what is your expectation regarding this patch? > > > > Are you planning to merge it or are you expecting this to go through > > some other tree? > > > > The binding-change here is backward-comaptible in that the old > > node-name is still in it, only marked as deprecated, so in theory > > this patch should be able to be applied on its own without > > causing defects. > > In an ideal world, it would be broken up and I would take the MFD > part. Is that possible or are there dependencies? That is also what Krzysztof had in mind - see his reply to patch4. Binding going through the MFD tree and soc maintainers applying the individual dts patches. As written the binding change is backward compatible, so no harm. I was just confused by the "Acked-by" and wanted to clarify how you see it ;-) Heiko
On 24/02/2022 11:06, Heiko Stuebner wrote: > Am Donnerstag, 24. Februar 2022, 11:02:48 CET schrieb Lee Jones: >> On Wed, 23 Feb 2022, Heiko Stuebner wrote: >> >>> Hi Lee, >>> >>> Am Mittwoch, 23. Februar 2022, 10:16:01 CET schrieb Lee Jones: >>>> On Mon, 14 Feb 2022, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>>> >>>>> Include generic pwm.yaml schema, which enforces PWM node naming. Keep >>>>> the old name in bindings as deprecated. >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@canonical.com> >>>>> --- >>>>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/google,cros-ec.yaml | 4 ++++ >>>> >>>> Acked-by: Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org> >>> >>> what is your expectation regarding this patch? >>> >>> Are you planning to merge it or are you expecting this to go through >>> some other tree? >>> >>> The binding-change here is backward-comaptible in that the old >>> node-name is still in it, only marked as deprecated, so in theory >>> this patch should be able to be applied on its own without >>> causing defects. >> >> In an ideal world, it would be broken up and I would take the MFD >> part. Is that possible or are there dependencies? > > That is also what Krzysztof had in mind - see his reply to patch4. > Binding going through the MFD tree and soc maintainers applying > the individual dts patches. > > As written the binding change is backward compatible, so no harm. > > I was just confused by the "Acked-by" and wanted to clarify how you > see it ;-) > The bindings patch should not be split more, but itself can be taken alone. DTS patches can go via SoC maintainer trees. Best regards, Krzysztof
On Thu, 24 Feb 2022, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 24/02/2022 11:06, Heiko Stuebner wrote: > > Am Donnerstag, 24. Februar 2022, 11:02:48 CET schrieb Lee Jones: > >> On Wed, 23 Feb 2022, Heiko Stuebner wrote: > >> > >>> Hi Lee, > >>> > >>> Am Mittwoch, 23. Februar 2022, 10:16:01 CET schrieb Lee Jones: > >>>> On Mon, 14 Feb 2022, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> Include generic pwm.yaml schema, which enforces PWM node naming. Keep > >>>>> the old name in bindings as deprecated. > >>>>> > >>>>> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@canonical.com> > >>>>> --- > >>>>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/google,cros-ec.yaml | 4 ++++ > >>>> > >>>> Acked-by: Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org> > >>> > >>> what is your expectation regarding this patch? > >>> > >>> Are you planning to merge it or are you expecting this to go through > >>> some other tree? > >>> > >>> The binding-change here is backward-comaptible in that the old > >>> node-name is still in it, only marked as deprecated, so in theory > >>> this patch should be able to be applied on its own without > >>> causing defects. > >> > >> In an ideal world, it would be broken up and I would take the MFD > >> part. Is that possible or are there dependencies? > > > > That is also what Krzysztof had in mind - see his reply to patch4. > > Binding going through the MFD tree and soc maintainers applying > > the individual dts patches. > > > > As written the binding change is backward compatible, so no harm. > > > > I was just confused by the "Acked-by" and wanted to clarify how you > > see it ;-) > > > > The bindings patch should not be split more, but itself can be taken > alone. DTS patches can go via SoC maintainer trees. So in answer to Heiko's question, either Thierry, Rob or I can take the patch. I'm not overly fussed which. If I am to take it, I need Thierry's go-ahead and info on whether he requires a PR or not.
On Mon, Feb 14, 2022 at 09:19:13AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > Include generic pwm.yaml schema, which enforces PWM node naming. Keep > the old name in bindings as deprecated. > > Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@canonical.com> > --- > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/google,cros-ec.yaml | 4 ++++ > .../devicetree/bindings/pwm/google,cros-ec-pwm.yaml | 5 ++++- > 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) Applied, thanks. Thierry
On Thu, 24 Feb 2022, Thierry Reding wrote: > On Mon, Feb 14, 2022 at 09:19:13AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > > Include generic pwm.yaml schema, which enforces PWM node naming. Keep > > the old name in bindings as deprecated. > > > > Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@canonical.com> > > --- > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/google,cros-ec.yaml | 4 ++++ > > .../devicetree/bindings/pwm/google,cros-ec-pwm.yaml | 5 ++++- > > 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > Applied, thanks. Super, thanks T.
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/google,cros-ec.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/google,cros-ec.yaml index d1f53bd449f7..0255b7028496 100644 --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/google,cros-ec.yaml +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/google,cros-ec.yaml @@ -89,6 +89,10 @@ properties: ec-pwm: $ref: "/schemas/pwm/google,cros-ec-pwm.yaml#" + deprecated: true + + pwm: + $ref: "/schemas/pwm/google,cros-ec-pwm.yaml#" keyboard-controller: $ref: "/schemas/input/google,cros-ec-keyb.yaml#" diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pwm/google,cros-ec-pwm.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pwm/google,cros-ec-pwm.yaml index 4cfbffd8414a..7ab6912a845f 100644 --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pwm/google,cros-ec-pwm.yaml +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pwm/google,cros-ec-pwm.yaml @@ -16,6 +16,9 @@ description: | An EC PWM node should be only found as a sub-node of the EC node (see Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/google,cros-ec.yaml). +allOf: + - $ref: pwm.yaml# + properties: compatible: const: google,cros-ec-pwm @@ -39,7 +42,7 @@ examples: compatible = "google,cros-ec-spi"; reg = <0>; - cros_ec_pwm: ec-pwm { + cros_ec_pwm: pwm { compatible = "google,cros-ec-pwm"; #pwm-cells = <1>; };
Include generic pwm.yaml schema, which enforces PWM node naming. Keep the old name in bindings as deprecated. Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@canonical.com> --- Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/google,cros-ec.yaml | 4 ++++ .../devicetree/bindings/pwm/google,cros-ec-pwm.yaml | 5 ++++- 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)