[PATCH v6 1/8] dt-bindings: pinctrl: mediatek,mt6779-pinctrl: Pull pinctrl node changes from MT6795 document

[Yassine Oudjana]

On 11/10/2024 7:56 pm, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 11, 2024 at 03:03:46PM +0300, Yassine Oudjana wrote:
>> From: Yassine Oudjana <y.oudjana at protonmail.com>
>>
>> mediatek,pinctrl-mt6795.yaml has different node name patterns which match
>> bindings of other MediaTek pin controllers, ref for pinmux-node.yaml which
>> has a description of the pinmux property, as well as some additional
>> descriptions for some pin configuration properties. Pull those changes
>> into mediatek,mt6779-pinctrl.yaml and adjust the example DTS to match in
>> preparation to combine the MT6795 document into it.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Yassine Oudjana <y.oudjana at protonmail.com>
>> ---
>>   .../pinctrl/mediatek,mt6779-pinctrl.yaml      | 38 ++++++++++++++-----
>>   1 file changed, 28 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/mediatek,mt6779-pinctrl.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/mediatek,mt6779-pinctrl.yaml
>> index 3bbc00df5548d..352a88d7b135e 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/mediatek,mt6779-pinctrl.yaml
>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/mediatek,mt6779-pinctrl.yaml
>> @@ -111,12 +111,12 @@ allOf:
>>           - "#interrupt-cells"
>>   
>>   patternProperties:
>> -  '-[0-9]*$':
>> +  '-pins$':
> 
> Worst case, this could be an ABI break. Best case, it's churn for
> mt6779. Is it worth unifying?

It's better than keeping different patterns, isn't it? We wouldn't have 
ended up here if they were made as one in the beginning as it was ought 
to be considering how similar the hardware is. It's easier to change now 
since nothing is using it yet.