Re: [PATCH 02/11] dt-bindings: pinctrl: document access-controllers property for stm32 HDP
From: Gatien CHEVALLIER <gatien.chevallier@foss.st.com>
Date: 2026-01-12 08:26:14
Also in:
linux-devicetree, linux-gpio, lkml
On 1/11/26 12:27, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
On 09/01/2026 11:55, Gatien Chevallier wrote:quoted
HDP being functional depends on the debug configuration on the platform that can be checked using the access-controllers property, document it. Signed-off-by: Gatien Chevallier <gatien.chevallier@foss.st.com> --- Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/st,stm32-hdp.yaml | 4 ++++ 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/st,stm32-hdp.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/st,stm32-hdp.yaml index 845b6b7b7552..75054c1e4044 100644 --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/st,stm32-hdp.yaml +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/st,stm32-hdp.yaml@@ -27,6 +27,10 @@ properties: clocks: maxItems: 1 + access-controllers: + minItems: 1 + maxItems: 2You need to list the items. Why is this flexible? Best regards, Krzysztof
I will need to list 2 items (2 different firewall controllers) for the stm32mp2x series that I planned doing in a second time. On stm32mp1x series, only debug configuration needs to be checked for this peripheral. On stm32mp2x series, both debug and RIFSC (which is the peripheral firewall) configurations need to be checked. By listing, you mean adding the description of each of the possible access controller, am I right? Can I keep it like this or do I introduce the flexibility when needed?