[PATCH v5 10/14] dt-bindings: firmware: Add fsl,scu yaml file

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 27/06/2022 13:49, Viorel Suman wrote:
> On 22-06-24 12:25:44, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 16/06/2022 18:42, Viorel Suman wrote:
>>> From: Abel Vesa <abel.vesa at nxp.com>
>>>
>>> In order to replace the fsl,scu txt file from bindings/arm/freescale,
>>> we need to split it between the right subsystems. This patch adds the
>>> fsl,scu.yaml in the firmware bindings folder. This one is only for
>>> the main SCU node. The old txt file will be removed only after all
>>> the child nodes have been properly switch to yaml.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Abel Vesa <abel.vesa at nxp.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: Viorel Suman <viorel.suman at nxp.com>
>>> ---
>>>  .../devicetree/bindings/firmware/fsl,scu.yaml | 170 ++++++++++++++++++
>>>  1 file changed, 170 insertions(+)
>>>  create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/fsl,scu.yaml
>>>
>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/fsl,scu.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/fsl,scu.yaml
> 
> [...]
> 
>>> +properties:
>>> +  $nodename:
>>> +    const: 'scu'
>>
>> Why enforcing node name? Second point is that node names should be
>> generic, so I wonder what "SCU" exactly means and whether it is generic?
>>
> 
> It stands for "System Control Unit" - looks generic to me.

Nope, it's specific, just like other scu - Snoop Control Unit. What's
more, reusing the same acronym leads to confusions.

If it was generic, then I expect it to be present in several other
places, but it's not (except the other SCU).

Generic name is for example "system-controller".

> I guess a reason to enforce it - need to check with Abel - might be
> the need to group multiple SCU implementations under a common known name.

Device bindings do not enforce the names, unless it's really needed, and
I doubt there is a need here.  Just drop it and rename nodes in DTS to
something generic.


Best regards,
Krzysztof