Re: SPAM (R/EU IT) // Re: [RFC PATCH v3 02/15] dt-bindings: mfd: Document ROHM BD71828 bindings

[Vaittinen, Matti]

Hello Again Rob,

And thanks again.

On Tue, 2019-11-05 at 14:43 -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 01, 2019 at 01:31:03PM +0200, Matti Vaittinen wrote:
> > ROHM BD71828 Power management IC integrates 7 buck converters, 7
> > LDOs,
> > a real-time clock (RTC), 3 GPO/regulator control pins, HALL input
> > and a 32.768 kHz clock gate.
> > 
> > Document the dt bindings drivers are using.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Matti Vaittinen <matti.vaittinen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > 
> > Changes from v2 - my first encounter with yaml :/
> > 
> >  .../bindings/mfd/rohm,bd71828-pmic.yaml       | 249
> > ++++++++++++++++++
> >  1 file changed, 249 insertions(+)
> >  create mode 100644
> > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/rohm,bd71828-pmic.yaml
> > 
> > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/rohm,bd71828-
> > pmic.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/rohm,bd71828-
> > pmic.yaml
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 000000000000..b2a88f6e1bb7
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/rohm,bd71828-pmic.yaml
> > @@ -0,0 +1,249 @@
> > +# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> 
> # SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause)
> 
> for new bindings.

Linus Walleij already notified me about this. I just wondered why this
is not reflected in:

LICENSES/preferred/GPL-2.0

which seems to state:
Valid-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
Valid-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only
Valid-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+
Valid-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-or-later
SPDX-URL: https://spdx.org/licenses/GPL-2.0.html
Usage-Guide:
  To use this license in source code, put one of the following SPDX
  tag/value pairs into a comment according to the placement
  guidelines in the licensing rules documentation.
  For 'GNU General Public License (GPL) version 2 only' use:
    SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
  or
    SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only


https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v5.4-rc5/source/LICENSES/preferred/GPL-2.0

I'll change the SPDX for new files for next version.


> 
> > +%YAML 1.2
> > +---
> > +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/mfd/rohm,bd71828-pmic.yaml#
> > +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml#
> > +
> > +title: ROHM BD71828 Power Management Integrated Circuit bindings
> > +
> > +maintainers:
> > +  - Lee Jones <lee.jones@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > +  - Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > +  - Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@xxxxxxx>
> 
> Don't list me or Mark here. I maintain everything...

Ok. So I'll add myself then. Although I am by no means an expert what
comes to binding schemas. I know the device and driver though.

> > +
> > +  clock-output-names:
> > +    description:
> > +      Should contain name for output clock.
> 
> Need to document what the name is. Though, with only 1 clock, not
> that 
> useful.

Hmmm. I thought this would depend on rest of the system's DT. Why
should it be same on each board? (I can drop this out though).

> > +  - |
> > +    #include <dt-bindings/interrupt-controller/irq.h>
> > +    #include <dt-bindings/leds/common.h>
> > +    i2c {
> 
> 'make dt_binding_check' reports an error building this, but I'm not 
> seeing where it is:
> 
> Error: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/rohm,bd71828-
> pmic.example.dts:155.36-37 syntax error
> FATAL ERROR: Unable to parse input tree

I guess it is the LED function definition. Those function/colour
bindings were only added in 5.4-rc1. Do you have them defined in your
build environment at /include/dt-bindings/leds/common.h?

Rest of the comments are clear to me :)

Br,
	Matti Vaittinen

> -- 
> > Matti Vaittinen, Linux device drivers
> > ROHM Semiconductors, Finland SWDC
> > Kiviharjunlenkki 1E
> > 90220 OULU
> > FINLAND
> > 
> > ~~~ "I don't think so," said Rene Descartes. Just then he vanished
> > ~~~
> > Simon says - in Latin please.
> > ~~~ "non cogito me" dixit Rene Descarte, deinde evanescavit ~~~
> > Thanks to Simon Glass for the translation =]