Re: [PATCH 07/10] dt-bindings: rng: add st,rng-lock-conf

[Gatien CHEVALLIER]

On 9/15/23 12:33, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 15/09/2023 11:28, Gatien CHEVALLIER wrote:
> > Hello Rob,
> >
> > On 9/11/23 17:09, Rob Herring wrote:
> > > On Fri, Sep 08, 2023 at 06:51:17PM +0200, Gatien Chevallier wrote:
> > > > If st,rng-lock-conf is set, the RNG configuration in RNG_CR, RNG_HTCR
> > > > and RNG_NSCR will be locked. It is supported starting from the RNG
> > > > version present in the STM32MP13
> > >
> > > This should be squashed into the prior binding patch.
> > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Gatien Chevallier <gatien.chevallier@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > ---
> > > >    .../devicetree/bindings/rng/st,stm32-rng.yaml      | 14 ++++++++++++++
> > > >    1 file changed, 14 insertions(+)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rng/st,stm32-rng.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rng/st,stm32-rng.yaml
> > > > index 59abdc85a9fb..0055f14a8e3f 100644
> > > > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rng/st,stm32-rng.yaml
> > > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rng/st,stm32-rng.yaml
> > > > @@ -37,6 +37,20 @@ required:
> > > >      - reg
> > > >      - clocks
> > > >    
> > > > +allOf:
> > > > +  - if:
> > > > +      properties:
> > > > +        compatible:
> > > > +          contains:
> > > > +            enum:
> > > > +              - st,stm32mp13-rng
> > > > +    then:
> > > > +      properties:
> > > > +        st,rng-lock-conf:
> > > > +          type: boolean
> > > > +          description: If set, the RNG configuration in RNG_CR, RNG_HTCR and
> > > > +                       RNG_NSCR will be locked.
> > >
> > > Define the property at the top-level and then restrict its presence in
> > > a if/then schema.
> >
> > Can you please point me to an example of such case. I can't find a way
> > to define at the top-level the property then restrict it to specific
> > compatibles.
>
> You can check my slides from the talks about not reaching 10 iterations
> of bindings patches.
>
> Or open example-schema (this should be your starting point):
> https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v5.19/source/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/example-schema.yaml#L212
>
>
> Also:
> https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.4-rc7/source/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/qcom,ipa.yaml#L174

Thank you for the links, it really helped me out.

> > Else I'd change
> > additionalProperties :false to
> > unevaluatedProperties: false
> >
> > so the definition of the property is seen.
>
> No, why? Definition is there when you move it to the top as asked.
>
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof