RE: [PATCH v2 2/6] dt-bindings: gpio: vf610: correct i.MX8ULP and i.MX93

[Peng Fan]

> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/6] dt-bindings: gpio: vf610: correct i.MX8ULP and
> i.MX93
> 
> On 16/09/2023 04:03, Peng Fan (OSS) wrote:
> > From: Peng Fan <peng.fan@xxxxxxx>
> >
> > i.MX8ULP and i.MX93 actually has two interrupts for each gpio
> > controller, one for Trustzone non-secure world, one for secure world.
> >
> > And they has one register based, not two as i.MX7ULP or VF610.
> >
> > Although the Linux Kernel driver gpio-vf610.c could work with
> > fsl,imx7ulp-gpio compatible, it is based on some tricks did in device
> > tree with some offset added to base address.
> >
> > So actually i.MX8ULP/i.MX93 is not compatible with i.MX7ULP.
> >
> > Last, i.MX93 is directly derived from i.MX8ULP, so make i.MX93 GPIO
> > compatible with i.MX8ULP
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Peng Fan <peng.fan@xxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >  .../devicetree/bindings/gpio/gpio-vf610.yaml       | 41
> +++++++++++++++++++---
> >  1 file changed, 37 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/gpio-vf610.yaml
> > b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/gpio-vf610.yaml
> > index 59427d97adf5..8c1f87a1a393 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/gpio-vf610.yaml
> > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/gpio-vf610.yaml
> > @@ -20,6 +20,7 @@ description: |
> >  properties:
> >    compatible:
> >      oneOf:
> > +      - const: fsl,imx8ulp-gpio
> >        - const: fsl,vf610-gpio
> >        - items:
> >            - const: fsl,imx7ulp-gpio
> > @@ -27,16 +28,21 @@ properties:
> >        - items:
> >            - enum:
> >                - fsl,imx93-gpio
> > -              - fsl,imx8ulp-gpio
> > -          - const: fsl,imx7ulp-gpio
> > +          - const: fsl,imx8ulp-gpio
> >
> >    reg:
> >      description: The first reg tuple represents the PORT module, the second
> tuple
> >        represents the GPIO module.
> > -    maxItems: 2
> > +    items:
> > +      - description: PORT register base address
> > +      - description: GPIO register base address
> > +    minItems: 1
> >
> >    interrupts:
> > -    maxItems: 1
> > +    items:
> > +      - description: GPIO Trustzone non-secure interrupt number
> > +      - description: GPIO Trustzone secure interrupt number
> > +    minItems: 1
> >
> >    interrupt-controller: true
> >
> > @@ -78,6 +84,33 @@ required:
> >    - "#gpio-cells"
> >    - gpio-controller
> >
> > +allOf:
> > +  - if:
> > +      properties:
> > +        compatible:
> > +          contains:
> > +            enum:
> > +              - fsl,vf610-gpio
> > +              - fsl,imx7ulp-gpio
> > +    then:
> > +      properties:
> > +        interrupts:
> > +          items:
> > +            - description: GPIO interrupt number
> 
> So this is different than first interrupt mentioned in top-level?

Should be same, I will use maxItems: 1 here.
> 
> 
> > +        reg:
> > +          items:
> > +            - description: PORT register base address
> > +            - description: GPIO register base address
> 
> You have the description in top-level, no need to repeat it. Just
> minItems: 2... although it depends whether top-level property will stay.

Ok, got it.
> 
> 
> > +    else:
> > +      properties:
> > +        interrupts:
> > +          items:
> > +            - description: GPIO Trustzone non-secure interrupt number
> > +            - description: GPIO Trustzone secure interrupt number
> > +        reg:
> > +          items:
> > +            - description: GPIO register base address
> 
> So the first entry is different between variants? Then top-level should be just
> min/maxItems.

Yes, I think so. Rob commented to list items in top level, so ..

Thanks,
Peng.


> 
> > +
> >  additionalProperties: false
> >
> >  examples:
> >
> 
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof