Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: mmc: renesas,sdhi: add top-level constraints

[Geert Uytterhoeven]

Hi Krzysztof,

On Sun, Aug 18, 2024 at 7:29 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski
<krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Properties with variable number of items per each device are expected to
> have widest constraints in top-level "properties:" block and further
> customized (narrowed) in "if:then:".  Add missing top-level constraints
> for clocks.
>
> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx>

Thanks for your patch!

> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mmc/renesas,sdhi.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mmc/renesas,sdhi.yaml
> @@ -77,9 +77,13 @@ properties:
>      minItems: 1
>      maxItems: 3
>
> -  clocks: true
> +  clocks:
> +    minItems: 1
> +    maxItems: 4
>
> -  clock-names: true
> +  clock-names:
> +    minItems: 1
> +    maxItems: 4
>
>    dmas:
>      minItems: 4

I am a bit puzzled by all these add-top-level-constraint patches.
E.g. this file already constrains all of them below.

To me, it feels the same as a patch for driver code that would do:

    +   if (param < 16 || param > 512)
    +           return -EINVAL;
    +
        if (hw_variant_a) {
                if (param < 16 || param > 256)
                        return -EINVAL;
                ...
        } else if (hw_variant_b) {
                if (param < 32 || param > 512)
                        return -EINVAL;
                ...
        } else /* hw_variant_c */ {
                if (param < 32 || param > 384)
                        return -EINVAL;
                ...
        }

What's the point?
Thanks!

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

                        Geert

-- 
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
                                -- Linus Torvalds