Re: [PATCH v2 2/8] dt-bindings: iio: adc: adi,ad4030: Reference spi-peripheral-props

On Fri, 19 Sep 2025 16:53:09 -0300
Marcelo Schmitt [off-list ref] wrote:

On 09/19, Conor Dooley wrote:

quoted

On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 02:39:01PM -0500, David Lechner wrote:  

quoted

On 9/18/25 12:38 PM, Marcelo Schmitt wrote:  

quoted

AD4030 and similar devices all connect to the system as SPI peripherals.
Reference spi-peripheral-props so common SPI peripheral can be used from
ad4030 dt-binding.

Signed-off-by: Marcelo Schmitt <marcelo.schmitt@analog.com>
---
 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/adc/adi,ad4030.yaml | 2 ++  

...

quoted

quoted

quoted

@@ -20,6 +20,8 @@ description: |
   * https://www.analog.com/media/en/technical-documentation/data-sheets/ad4630-24_ad4632-24.pdf
   * https://www.analog.com/media/en/technical-documentation/data-sheets/ad4630-16-4632-16.pdf
 
+$ref: /schemas/spi/spi-peripheral-props.yaml#  

I think this is already referenced for all child nodes of a SPI
controller because of pattern matching of:

patternProperties:
  "^.*@[0-9a-f]+$":
    type: object
    $ref: spi-peripheral-props.yaml

in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/spi-controller.yaml

So perhaps not strictly necessary?

Would be curious to know if there is some difference.  

I think it's good form if you're actually referencing the properties. I
don't know if it actually makes a difference in the end result of
dtbs_check but it may in terms of making sure properties in this binding
are properly typed when it is tested against. In this case, it appears
you're only looking at uint32 properties so it mightn't have any impact.
Rob would know for sure.
  

There's no difference, at least on dt_binding_check output.
Initial idea was to allow using properties from spi-peripheral-props.yaml, but
they are already available through the pattern in spi-controller.yaml.
If the noise doesn't worth it, I don't mind dropping this patch.

I agree with Conor. Having this here might not be strictly necessary but it
helps a reader of this binding know that those properties are relevant.
So I think keep it.

Jonathan

Thanks,
Marcelo