[PATCH 1/4] dt-bindings: pinctrl: Combine MediaTek MT67xx pinctrl binding docs

[AngeloGioacchino Del Regno]

Il 21/09/22 11:30, yassine.oudjana at gmail.com ha scritto:
> 
> 
> On Wed, Sep 21 2022 at 09:11:12 AM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski 
> <krzysztof.kozlowski at linaro.org> wrote:
>> On 20/09/2022 10:06, AngeloGioacchino Del Regno wrote:
>>>  Il 19/09/22 19:01, Yassine Oudjana ha scritto:
>>>>  From: Yassine Oudjana <y.oudjana at protonmail.com>
>>>>
>>>>  Documents for MT6779, MT6795 and MT6797 that currently exist share
>>>>  most properties, and each one has slightly differently worded
>>>>  descriptions for those properties. Combine all three documents into
>>>>  one common document for all MT67xx SoC pin controllers, picking a few
>>>>  parts from each and accounting for differences such as items in reg
>>>>  and reg-names properties. Also document the MT6765 pin controller
>>>>  which currently has a driver but no DT binding documentation. It should
>>>>  be possible to also include bindings for MT8183 and MT8188, but these
>>>>  have some additional properties that might complicate things a bit,
>>>>  so they are left alone for now.
>>>>
>>>>  Signed-off-by: Yassine Oudjana <y.oudjana at protonmail.com>
>>>>  ---
>>>>    .../pinctrl/mediatek,mt6779-pinctrl.yaml      | 207 ------------------
>>>>    .../pinctrl/mediatek,mt6797-pinctrl.yaml      | 176 ---------------
>>>>    ...6795.yaml => mediatek,mt67xx-pinctrl.yaml} | 181 +++++++++++----
>>>
>>>  Hello Yassine,
>>>  nice cleanup over here!
>>>
>>>  There's a catch though: as far as I know, wildcards are not permitted... so you
>>>  should, at this point, merge all of these in mediatek,mt6779-pinctrl.yaml instead.
>>>
>>>  Before jumping to that, though... Krzysztof, can you please confirm (or deny)?
>>
>> Wildcards are not allowed in compatibles. In filename wildcards or
>> family name could work if they are really going to match the devices. I
>> have doubts here. 67xx is quite a lot of different devices, so I am not
>> sure this will cover them all.
>>
>> I would prefer one name (oldest SoC or lowest number).
> 
> Lowest number (and probably oldest too but not sure since mediatek naming 
> conventions are a bit weird) currently documented is mt6779, but mt6765 gets 
> documented in this patch and mt6735 (this one I know for sure is older than the 
> rest) in a following patch, so do I just stick with mt6779 or do I change it in the 
> following patches documenting mt6765 and mt6735?
> 

I see the sequence as:

1. You merge mediatek,mt6797-pinctrl.yaml into mediatek,mt6779-pinctrl.yaml; then
2. Adding MT6765 documentation to mediatek,mt6779-pinctrl.yaml; then
3. Adding support for MT6735, documentation goes again to 6779-pinctrl.

This means that you're working with mediatek,mt6779-pinctrl.yaml :-)

P.S.: That was also a suggestion about how to split things per-commit!

Cheers,
Angelo

> Thanks,
> Yassine
> 
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Krzysztof
> 
>