Re: [PATCH net-next v4 2/6] dt-bindings: net: Brcm ASP 2.0 Ethernet controller

On Tue, May 23, 2023 at 11:56 PM Conor Dooley
[off-list ref] wrote:

On Wed, May 24, 2023 at 07:51:07AM +0100, Conor Dooley wrote:

quoted

Hey Justin,
On Tue, May 23, 2023 at 04:27:12PM -0700, Justin Chen wrote:

quoted

On Tue, May 23, 2023 at 3:55 PM Conor Dooley [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On Tue, May 23, 2023 at 02:53:43PM -0700, Justin Chen wrote:

quoted

+  compatible:
+    enum:
+      - brcm,asp-v2.0
+      - brcm,bcm72165-asp
+      - brcm,asp-v2.1
+      - brcm,bcm74165-asp

quoted

+        compatible = "brcm,bcm72165-asp", "brcm,asp-v2.0";

You can't do this, as Rob's bot has pointed out. Please test the
bindings :( You need one of these type of constructs:

compatible:
  oneOf:
    - items:
        - const: brcm,bcm72165-asp
        - const: brcm,asp-v2.0
    - items:
        - const: brcm,bcm74165-asp
        - const: brcm,asp-v2.1

Although, given either you or Florian said there are likely to be
multiple parts, going for an enum, rather than const for the brcm,bcm..
entry will prevent some churn. Up to you.

Urg so close. Thought it was a trivial change, so didn't bother
retesting the binding. I think I have it right now...

  compatible:
    oneOf:
      - items:
          - enum:
              - brcm,bcm72165-asp
              - brcm,bcm74165-asp
          - enum:
              - brcm,asp-v2.0
              - brcm,asp-v2.1

Something like this look good?

I am still caffeine-less, but this implies that both of
"brcm,bcm72165-asp", "brcm,asp-v2.0"
_and_
"brcm,bcm72165-asp", "brcm,asp-v2.1"
are. I suspect that that is not the case, unless "brcm,asp-v2.0" is a

I a word. s/are/are valid/

Gotcha. I got something like this now.

  compatible:
    oneOf:
      - items:
          - enum:
              - brcm,bcm74165-asp
          - const: brcm,asp-v2.1
      - items:
          - enum:
              - brcm,bcm72165-asp
          - const: brcm,asp-v2.0

Apologies, still getting used to this yaml stuff. Starting to make a
bit more sense to me now.

quoted

valid fallback for "brcm,asp-v2.1"?
The oneOf: also becomes redundant since you only have one items:.

quoted

Will submit a v5 tomorrow.

BTW, when you do, could you use the address listed in MAINTAINERS rather
than the one you used for this version?

I changed the address listed in MAINTAINERS from the previous versions
of this patchset. The current version should match the address that
this patch set was sent from. Looks like I forgot to add a changelog
for that in v4.

Thanks,
Justin

quoted

Cheers,
Conor.