[PATCH RFT 2/6] gpio: mmio: get chip label and GPIO base from device properties
Bartosz Golaszewski
brgl at bgdev.pl
Wed Jun 25 03:28:58 PDT 2025
On Wed, Jun 25, 2025 at 12:26 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk at kernel.org> wrote:
>
> >>>> I wouldn't be stoked to see device trees abusing the "gpio-mmio,base"
> >>>> property all of a sudden just because it now exists as a device
> >>>> property though... I kind of wish we had a way to opt out of exposing
> >>>> this to all the sub-property paths. But it seems tiresome, so:
> >>>>
> >>>> Reviewed-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij at linaro.org>
> >>>>
> >>>> Yours,
> >>>> Linus Walleij
> >>>
> >>> That's not a problem - this property is not in any DT bindings and as
> >>> such is not an allowed property in DT sources. For out-of-tree DTs? We
> >>> don't care about those.
> >> That's not true, we do care about implied ABI. Try changing/breaking
> >> this later, when users complain their out of tree DTS is affected, and
> >> explaining this all to Greg.
> >>
> >
> > Wait, seriously? I thought that the upstream bindings are the source
> > of truth for device-tree sources...
>
>
> They are, until they are not... ok, we don't really care that much about
> out of tree DTS, but in-tree DTS still could use these and don't care
> about bindings check, right?
>
Could they though? I can imagine this happening by accident but in
general: you'd expect new sources to follow the bindings and be
verifiable against them? Otherwise, what's the point of the schema?
Bart
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list