Re: [PATCH v2 06/17] dt-bindings: rng: add bindings for microchip mpfs rng

On 17/12/2021 16:22, Conor.Dooley@microchip.com wrote:

On 17/12/2021 15:07, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:

quoted

EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe

On 17/12/2021 15:53, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:

quoted

On 17/12/2021 10:33, conor.dooley@microchip.com wrote:

quoted

From: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>

Add device tree bindings for the hardware rng device accessed via
the system services on the Microchip PolarFire SoC.

Signed-off-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>
---
  .../bindings/rng/microchip,mpfs-rng.yaml      | 29 +++++++++++++++++++
  1 file changed, 29 insertions(+)
  create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rng/microchip,mpfs-rng.yaml

diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rng/microchip,mpfs-rng.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rng/microchip,mpfs-rng.yaml
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..32cbc37c9292
--- /dev/null
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rng/microchip,mpfs-rng.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1,29 @@
+# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause)
+%YAML 1.2
+---
+$id: "http://devicetree.org/schemas/rng/microchip,mpfs-rng.yaml#"
+$schema: "http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml#"
+
+title: Microchip MPFS random number generator
+
+maintainers:
+  - Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>
+
+description: |
+  The hardware random number generator on the Polarfire SoC is
+  accessed via the mailbox interface provided by the system controller
+
+properties:
+  compatible:
+    const: microchip,mpfs-rng
+
+required:
+  - compatible
+
+additionalProperties: false
+
+examples:
+  - |
+    hwrandom: hwrandom {

Three topics:
1. Node name (as most of others are using): rng
2. skip the label, not helping in example.
3. This looks very simple, so I wonder if the bindings are complete. No
IO space/address... How is it going to be instantiated?

OK, now I saw the usage in DTS. I have doubts this makes sense as
separate bindings. It looks like integrated part of syscontroller, so
maybe make it part of that binding? Or at least add ref to syscontroller
bindings that such child is expected.

Acking the rest of this, re: adding the ref: is what is being done in 
patch 03/17 insufficient?

Ops, I missed the 03/17. Yeah, it looks it is sufficient and in such
case I think you do not need this patch. The compatible is documented in
03/17. The same for sysserv.


Best regards,
Krzysztof