Re: [PATCH v3 3/4] dt-bindings: can: renesas,rcar-canfd: Document RZ/T2H and RZ/N2H SoCs

[Geert Uytterhoeven]

On Mon, 12 Jan 2026 at 18:22, Lad, Prabhakar <prabhakar.csengg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 12, 2026 at 4:30 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On 12/01/2026 15:04, Lad, Prabhakar wrote:
> > >   - if:
> > >       properties:
> > >         compatible:
> > >           contains:
> > >             # SoCs WITH resets but WITHOUT reset-names
> > >             enum:
> > >               - renesas,rcar-gen3-canfd
> > >               - renesas,rcar-gen4-canfd
> > >     then:
> > >       required:
> > >         - resets
> > >       properties:
> > >         reset-names: false
> > >
> >
> > Yes, although now I wonder why do you have such case... There are no
> > benefits in disallowing reset-names, even for single entries.

Except that I have no idea which of the two names I should use in
case of renesas,rcar-gen3-canfd and renesas,rcar-gen4-canfd, as
the hardware documentation doesn't explain that?  AFAIU it is just
a single, common reset for the whole block...

> Ok, I will update the resets property in patch 1/4 as below. Would you
> prefer reset-names as a required property for single resets?
>
>   reset-names:
>     minItems: 1
>     maxItems: 2
>     items:
>       enum:
>         - rstp_n
>         - rstc_n

I.e. which one should I pick?
<grin>Obviously the first, so dtbs_check succeeds?</grin>

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