Hi Rob,

El 16 mar 2021, a las 21:54, Rob Herring [off-list ref] escribió:

On Mon, Mar 15, 2021 at 12:41:55PM +0100, Álvaro Fernández Rojas wrote:

quoted

Add binding documentation for the GPIO controller found in BCM6318, BCM6328,
BCM6358, BCM6362, BCM6368 and BCM63268 SoCs.

Co-developed-by: Jonas Gorski <jonas.gorski@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Jonas Gorski <jonas.gorski@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Álvaro Fernández Rojas <redacted>
---
v7: new patch, splitted from pinctrl documentation

.../bindings/gpio/brcm,bcm63xx-gpio.yaml      | 83 +++++++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 83 insertions(+)
create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/brcm,bcm63xx-gpio.yaml

diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/brcm,bcm63xx-gpio.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/brcm,bcm63xx-gpio.yaml
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..94a4f00ae2c7
--- /dev/null
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/brcm,bcm63xx-gpio.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1,83 @@
+# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause
+%YAML 1.2
+---
+$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/gpio/brcm,bcm63xx-gpio.yaml#
+$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml#
+
+title: Broadcom BCM63xx GPIO controller
+
+maintainers:
+  - Álvaro Fernández Rojas <noltari@gmail.com>
+  - Jonas Gorski <jonas.gorski@gmail.com>
+
+description: |+
+  The GPIO controller node should be the child of a syscon node.
+
+  Refer to the the bindings described in
+  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/syscon.yaml

The above description is not too useful because it should hopefully 
later on in the series be expressed as a schema. IOW, the syscon schema 
should have a gpio child node with a $ref to this schema.

Is the following OK?
description:
  BCM63XX GPIO controller driver which supports the SoC system controller supplied GPIO registers.
  The BCM63XX GPIO controller node must be defined as a child node of the BCM63XX GPIO system controller node.

What would be useful is to say something about the GPIO block.

Something like…?

quoted

+
+properties:
+  compatible:
+    enum:
+      - brcm,bcm6318-gpio
+      - brcm,bcm6328-gpio
+      - brcm,bcm6358-gpio
+      - brcm,bcm6362-gpio
+      - brcm,bcm6368-gpio
+      - brcm,bcm63268-gpio
+
+  data:
+    $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/uint32
+    description: |
+      Offset in the register map for the data register (in bytes).
+
+  dirout:
+    $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/uint32
+    description: |
+      Offset in the register map for the dirout register (in bytes).

As I said earlier, copy what brcm,bcm6345-gpio.txt did and use reg 
instead of data and dirout properties.

Ok, I will remove dirout and data properties.

That binding says it is for bcm63xx SoCs, too. So that should be 
resolved. It looks like it should be 1 binding IMO. The only difference 
I see is the number of GPIO lines and register size. The fact that the 
parent is a syscon in some cases is irrelevant.

Please be more specific.
What do you want me to do with this? How should I handle that?

quoted

+
+  gpio-controller: true
+
+  "#gpio-cells":
+    const: 2
+
+  gpio-ranges:
+    maxItems: 1
+
+  reg:
+    maxItems: 1
+
+required:
+  - compatible
+  - gpio-controller
+  - gpio-ranges
+  - '#gpio-cells'
+
+additionalProperties: false
+
+examples:
+  - |
+    gpio@0 {
+      compatible = "brcm,bcm6328-gpio";
+      reg = <0x0 0x10>;
+
+      data = <0xc>;
+      dirout = <0x4>;
+
+      gpio-controller;
+      gpio-ranges = <&pinctrl 0 0 32>;
+      #gpio-cells = <2>;
+    };
+
+  - |
+    gpio@0 {
+      compatible = "brcm,bcm63268-gpio";
+      reg = <0x0 0x10>;
+
+      data = <0xc>;
+      dirout = <0x4>;
+
+      gpio-controller;
+      gpio-ranges = <&pinctrl 0 0 52>;
+      #gpio-cells = <2>;
+    };
-- 
2.20.1