Re: [PATCH v2 01/15] dt-bindings: gpio: convert bindings for NXP PCA953x family to dtschema

[Nishanth Menon]

On 20:53-20200910, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Sep 2020 at 20:28, Nishanth Menon <nm@xxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > On 19:57-20200910, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > [...]
> > > +  wakeup-source:
> > > +    $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/flag
> > > +
> > > +patternProperties:
> > > +  "^(hog-[0-9]+|.+-hog(-[0-9]+)?)$":
> >
> > I wonder if "hog" is too generic and might clash with "something-hog" in
> > the future?
> 
> This pattern is already used in
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/fsl-imx-gpio.yaml. It will
> match only children and so far it did not find any other nodes in ARM
> and ARM64 dts. I don't expect clashes. Also the question is then - if
> one adds a child of GPIO expander named "foobar-hog" and it is not a
> GPIO hog, then what is it?

Probably a nitpick.. but then,.. I have'nt seen us depend on hierarchy
for uniqueness of naming.. we choose for example "bus" no matter where
in the hierarchy it falls in, as long it is a bus.. etc.. same argument
holds good for properties as well.. "gpio-hog;" is kinda redundant if
you think of it for a compatible that is already gpio ;)..

I did'nt mean to de-rail the discussion, but was curious what the DT
maintainers think..

-- 
Regards,
Nishanth Menon
Key (0xDDB5849D1736249D) / Fingerprint: F8A2 8693 54EB 8232 17A3  1A34 DDB5 849D 1736 249D