[PATCH] dt-bindings: pinctrl: stm32: add missing entries for gpio subnodes

[Alexandre TORGUE]

On 9/23/22 11:21, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 23/09/2022 10:29, Alexandre TORGUE wrote:
>> Hi Krzysztof
>>
>> On 9/19/22 13:32, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>> On 13/09/2022 09:46, Alexandre Torgue wrote:
>>>> Add "interrupt-controller" and gpio-line-names to gpio subnodes in order to
>>>> fix dtb validation.
>>>
>>> Rebase your patch on recent Linux kernel and use get_maintainers.pl.
>>
>> I did it on 6.0-rc5 but yes I used your kernel.org address instead of
>> linaro ones. Sorry.
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Alexandre Torgue <alexandre.torgue at foss.st.com>
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/st,stm32-pinctrl.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/st,stm32-pinctrl.yaml
>>>> index d35dcc4f0242..92582cccbb1b 100644
>>>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/st,stm32-pinctrl.yaml
>>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/st,stm32-pinctrl.yaml
>>>> @@ -65,6 +65,10 @@ patternProperties:
>>>>          '#gpio-cells':
>>>>            const: 2
>>>>    
>>>> +      interrupt-controller: true
>>>> +      '#interrupt-cells':
>>>> +        const: 2
>>>> +
>>>>          reg:
>>>>            maxItems: 1
>>>>          clocks:
>>>> @@ -80,6 +84,8 @@ patternProperties:
>>>>            minimum: 1
>>>>            maximum: 16
>>>>    
>>>> +      gpio-line-names: true
>>>
>>> maxItems?
>>
>> Generic question, Is it mandatory to add maxItems information for all
>> entries ?
> 
> It's not mandatory for all. For some it is recommended, for some it does
> not make sense. Here it's quite easy to add and it will validate the
> entry. Any reason not to add it?

Ok understood. To be honest, no reasons to not add it.

cheers
alex

> 
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof
>