[PATCH v3 3/4] dt-bindings: sram: sunxi-sram: Add optional regulators child

[Samuel Holland]

On 8/16/22 4:59 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 15/08/2022 07:34, Samuel Holland wrote:
>> Some sunxi SoCs have in-package regulators controlled by a register in
>> the system control MMIO block. Allow a child node for these regulators
>> in addition to SRAM child nodes.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Samuel Holland <samuel at sholland.org>
>> ---
>>
>> Changes in v3:
>>  - Require the regulators node to have a unit address
>>  - Reference the regulator schema from the SRAM controller schema
>>  - Move the system LDOs example to the SRAM controller schema
>>  - Reorder the patches so the example passes validation
>>
>> Changes in v2:
>>  - New patch for v2
>>
>>  .../allwinner,sun4i-a10-system-control.yaml   | 29 +++++++++++++++++++
>>  1 file changed, 29 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sram/allwinner,sun4i-a10-system-control.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sram/allwinner,sun4i-a10-system-control.yaml
>> index d64c1b28fb61..915ca85c3f10 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sram/allwinner,sun4i-a10-system-control.yaml
>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sram/allwinner,sun4i-a10-system-control.yaml
>> @@ -56,6 +56,10 @@ properties:
>>    ranges: true
>>  
>>  patternProperties:
>> +  "^regulators@[0-9a-f]+$":
>> +    $ref: /schemas/regulator/allwinner,sun20i-d1-system-ldos.yaml#
>> +    unevaluatedProperties: false
> 
> unevaluatedProperties is not needed. Your other schema does not allow
> anything else here.

I can remove it. I added it because it looks like the dt-schema tools use it as
an indicator that the matched properties are child nodes[1]. Maybe that is not
relevant here?

Regards,
Samuel

[1]: https://github.com/devicetree-org/dt-schema/commit/b12b3737cabc