Re: [PATCH v2 17/21] dt-bindings: ipmi: Convert ASPEED KCS binding to schema
From: Andrew Jeffery <hidden>
Date: 2021-04-09 05:33:37
Also in:
linux-aspeed, linux-devicetree, linux-gpio, lkml, openbmc
On Fri, 9 Apr 2021, at 14:45, Zev Weiss wrote:
On Fri, Mar 19, 2021 at 01:27:48AM CDT, Andrew Jeffery wrote:quoted
Given the deprecated binding, improve the ability to detect issues in the platform devicetrees. Further, a subsequent patch will introduce a new interrupts property for specifying SerIRQ behaviour, so convert before we do any further additions. Signed-off-by: Andrew Jeffery <redacted> --- .../bindings/ipmi/aspeed,ast2400-kcs-bmc.yaml | 92 +++++++++++++++++++ .../bindings/ipmi/aspeed-kcs-bmc.txt | 33 ------- 2 files changed, 92 insertions(+), 33 deletions(-) create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ipmi/aspeed,ast2400-kcs-bmc.yaml delete mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ipmi/aspeed-kcs-bmc.txtdiff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ipmi/aspeed,ast2400-kcs-bmc.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ipmi/aspeed,ast2400-kcs-bmc.yaml new file mode 100644 index 000000000000..697ca575454f --- /dev/null +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ipmi/aspeed,ast2400-kcs-bmc.yaml@@ -0,0 +1,92 @@ +# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause) +%YAML 1.2 +--- +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/ipmi/aspeed,ast2400-kcs-bmc.yaml +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml + +title: ASPEED BMC KCS Devices + +maintainers: + - Andrew Jeffery <andrew@aj.id.au> + +description: | + The Aspeed BMC SoCs typically use the Keyboard-Controller-Style (KCS) + interfaces on the LPC bus for in-band IPMI communication with their host. + +properties: + compatible: + oneOf: + - description: Channel ID derived from reg + items: + enum: + - aspeed,ast2400-kcs-bmc-v2 + - aspeed,ast2500-kcs-bmc-v2 + - aspeed,ast2600-kcs-bmcShould this have a "-v2" suffix?
Well, that was kind of a matter of perspective. The 2600 compatible was added after we'd done the v2 of the binding for the 2400 and 2500 so it never needed correcting. But it is a case of "don't use the deprecated properties with the 2600 compatible". I don't think a change is necessary? Cheers, Andrew _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel