[PATCH v2 1/4] dt-bindings: dma: ti: k3-*: Add descriptions for register regions

[Vignesh Raghavendra]

On 22/11/23 21:49, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 22/11/2023 16:42, Vignesh Raghavendra wrote:
>> In preparation for introducing more register regions, add description
>> for existing register regions so that its easier to map reg-names to
>> that of SoC Documentations/TRMs.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr at ti.com>
>> ---
>>  .../devicetree/bindings/dma/ti/k3-bcdma.yaml  | 26 +++++++++++--------
>>  .../devicetree/bindings/dma/ti/k3-pktdma.yaml |  6 ++++-
>>  .../devicetree/bindings/dma/ti/k3-udma.yaml   |  5 +++-
>>  3 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dma/ti/k3-bcdma.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dma/ti/k3-bcdma.yaml
>> index 4ca300a42a99..b5444800b036 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dma/ti/k3-bcdma.yaml
>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dma/ti/k3-bcdma.yaml
>> @@ -35,14 +35,6 @@ properties:
>>        - ti,am64-dmss-bcdma
>>        - ti,j721s2-dmss-bcdma-csi
>>  
>> -  reg:
>> -    minItems: 3
>> -    maxItems: 5
>> -
>> -  reg-names:
>> -    minItems: 3
>> -    maxItems: 5
> 
> Why do you remove properties from top-level? You shouldn't. We expect
> there to have widest constrains. This is not explained in commit msg and
> really not justified looking at further diff hunks.
> 

Sorry, I didn't realize having top-level constraints is a requirement
and thought individual compatibles enforcing that actual constraints is
sufficient. Will add these back in v3.

> Best regards,
> Krzysztof
> 

-- 
Regards
Vignesh