Re: [PATCH 1/6] dt-bindings: thermal: tsens: Add nvmem cells for calibration data

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 11/07/2023 11:39, Praveenkumar I wrote:
> 
> On 7/11/2023 1:40 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 10/07/2023 12:37, Praveenkumar I wrote:
>>> Add TSENS V2 calibration nvmem cells for IPQ5332
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Praveenkumar I <quic_ipkumar@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> ---
>>>   .../bindings/thermal/qcom-tsens.yaml          | 26 +++++++++++++++++--
>>>   1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/thermal/qcom-tsens.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/thermal/qcom-tsens.yaml
>>> index 27e9e16e6455..8b7863c3989e 100644
>>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/thermal/qcom-tsens.yaml
>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/thermal/qcom-tsens.yaml
>>> @@ -91,7 +91,7 @@ properties:
>>>       maxItems: 2
>>>   
>>>     nvmem-cells:
>>> -    oneOf:
>>> +    anyOf:
>>>         - minItems: 1
>>>           maxItems: 2
>>>           description:
>>> @@ -106,9 +106,13 @@ properties:
>>>           description: |
>>>             Reference to nvmem cells for the calibration mode, two calibration
>>>             bases and two cells per each sensor, main and backup copies, plus use_backup cell
>>> +      - maxItems: 17
>>> +        description: |
>>> +          V2 of TSENS, reference to nvmem cells for the calibration mode, two calibration
>>> +          bases and one cell per each sensor
>> I think this is already included in one of the previous entries.
>> Otherwise, are you sure that all new devices will have exactly 17 entries?
> Previous entries does not support TSENS version 2.X.X QFPROM. TSENS V2 
> QFPROM has mode, base0, base1 and s[0-15]+_offset.
> Ideally it should be like,
> - minItems: 4
> - maxItems: 19

I see it covered:
minItems: 5
maxItems: 35

I think 17 is between 5 and 35.

> But dt binding check fails in oneOf / anyOf condition. So added the 
> IPQ5332 properties which is exactly 17.
>>
>>>   
>>>     nvmem-cell-names:
>>> -    oneOf:
>>> +    anyOf:
>>>         - minItems: 1
>>>           items:
>>>             - const: calib
>>> @@ -205,6 +209,24 @@ properties:
>>>             - const: s9_p2_backup
>>>             - const: s10_p1_backup
>>>             - const: s10_p2_backup
>>> +      - items:
>>> +          - const: mode
>>> +          - const: base0
>>> +          - const: base1
>>> +          - const: s0_offset
>>> +          - const: s3_offset
>>> +          - const: s4_offset
>>> +          - const: s5_offset
>>> +          - const: s6_offset
>>> +          - const: s7_offset
>>> +          - const: s8_offset
>>> +          - const: s9_offset
>>> +          - const: s10_offset
>>> +          - const: s11_offset
>>> +          - const: s12_offset
>>> +          - const: s13_offset
>>> +          - const: s14_offset
>>> +          - const: s15_offset
>> Don't introduce new naming style. Existing uses s[0-9]+, without offset
>> suffix. Why this should be different?
> As I mentioned above, s[0-9]+_p1 / s[0-9]+p2 is for TSENS V1. TSENS V2 
> QFPROM layout is different from the existing one.

I know, I did not write about p1/p2.

> I would like to add mode, base0, base1 and 16 patterns 
> '^s[0-15]+_offset$'. But DT binding check is failing in oneOf/ anyOf 
> condintion.

This does not explain why you need different style - this "offset" suffix.

Best regards,
Krzysztof