Re: [PATCH 2/4] dt-bindings: clock: Convert ti,sci-clk to json schema

[Nishanth Menon]

On 17:31-20210421, Rob Herring wrote:
[...]

> > > > +allOf:
> > > > +  - $ref: /schemas/clock/clock.yaml#
> > > 
> > > Is this needed?
> 
> No. It is already applied to every node.
> 
> > https://github.com/devicetree-org/dt-schema/blob/master/schemas/clock/clock.yaml
> > This standardizes provider properties like '#clock-cells' etc, allowing
> > you to add more stricter checks or controls in the future if necessary.
> > 
> > while:
> > 
> > https://github.com/devicetree-org/dt-schema/blob/master/meta-schemas/clocks.yaml
> > is more a consumer node description.
> 
> No, the meta-schema is what checks the schemas just as the schemas check 
> dts files.


I will drop and respin. thanks for explaining.

> 
> > Should I have picked a different yaml as base for a standard clock-controller
> > base?
> > 
> > > 
> > > > +
> > > > +description: |
> > > > +  Some TI SoCs contain a system controller (like the Power Management Micro
> > > > +  Controller (PMMC) on Keystone 66AK2G SoC) that are responsible for controlling
> > > > +  the state of the various hardware modules present on the SoC. Communication
> > > > +  between the host processor running an OS and the system controller happens
> > > > +  through a protocol called TI System Control Interface (TI-SCI protocol).
> > > > +
> > > > +  This clock controller node uses the TI SCI protocol to perform various clock
> > > > +  management of various hardware modules (devices) present on the SoC. This
> > > > +  node must be a child node of the associated TI-SCI system controller node.
> > > > +
> > > > +properties:
> > > > +  $nodename:
> > > > +    pattern: "^clock-controller$"
> > > 
> > > Is this nodename pattern check required?
> > 
> > I'd like the definition on rails and not subject to interpretation, and
> > restrict the kind of subnodes under TISCI controller node.
> 
> If this schema was standalone and not defined as part of another, then 
> yes it would be required. In your case, you can enforce the node name 
> from the parent schema. For consistency though, it would be better to 
> just always require $nodename. 
> 
> Actually, this schema will be applied twice. On it's own matching the 
> compatible string and by the parent schema. You can prevent that with 
> 'select: false'. I don't mind the double validation as if the parent 
> node had a compatible typo you'd get zero validation.

Sure. I will keep nodename.

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