[PATCH v2 1/3] dt-bindings: hwlock: Adding brcmstb-hwspinlock support

[Rob Herring]

On Wed, Oct 01, 2025 at 02:16:39PM -0400, Kamal Dasu wrote:
> Adding brcmstb-hwspinlock bindings.

That's obvious from the diff. Tell us something about the h/w and 
convince me we don't need per SoC compatible which is standard practice.

> 
> Signed-off-by: Kamal Dasu <kamal.dasu at broadcom.com>
> ---
>  .../hwlock/brcm,brcmstb-hwspinlock.yaml       | 36 +++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 36 insertions(+)
>  create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/hwlock/brcm,brcmstb-hwspinlock.yaml
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/hwlock/brcm,brcmstb-hwspinlock.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/hwlock/brcm,brcmstb-hwspinlock.yaml
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000000..f45399b4fe0b
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/hwlock/brcm,brcmstb-hwspinlock.yaml
> @@ -0,0 +1,36 @@
> +# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause)
> +%YAML 1.2
> +---
> +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/hwlock/brcm,brcmstb-hwspinlock.yaml#
> +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml#
> +
> +title: Broadcom settop Hardware Spinlock
> +
> +maintainers:
> +  - Kamal Dasu <kamal.dasu at broadcom.com>
> +
> +properties:
> +  compatible:
> +    const: brcm,brcmstb-hwspinlock

hwspinlock is the name of the h/w block? Use the name of the h/w, not 
linux subsystem names.

> +
> +  "#hwlock-cells":
> +    const: 1
> +
> +  reg:
> +    maxItems: 1
> +
> +required:
> +  - compatible
> +  - reg
> +  - "#hwlock-cells"
> +
> +additionalProperties: false
> +
> +examples:
> +  - |
> +    hwlock at 8404038 {
> +        compatible = "brcm,brcmstb-hwspinlock";
> +        reg = <0x8404038 0x40>;

h/w blocks rarely start at an offset like that. Is this part of some 
other h/w block? If so, then just add '#hwlock-cells' to *that* node.

> +        #hwlock-cells = <1>;
> +    };
> +
> -- 
> 2.34.1
>