[PATCH v2] dt-bindings: mfd: rk808: Convert bindings to yaml

[Chris Morgan]

On Thu, Sep 16, 2021 at 07:49:06PM -0500, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Sep 2021 15:19:47 -0500, Chris Morgan wrote:
> > From: Chris Morgan <macromorgan at hotmail.com>
> > 
> > Convert the rk808 bindings into yaml format. Please note that currently
> > there are a few errors that appear when performing a make dtbs_check.
> > However, after looking at the errors it appears in most cases it occurs
> > on device trees which are not following the current rk808.txt document
> > today. For example for the rk808 there are multiple errors regarding
> > vcc13-supply, vcc14-supply, and vddio-supply; however these supplies
> > are not listed in the current driver or cared for in any way.
> > 
> > For the moment the rk817 is the only MFD that will support a battery.
> > I believe the rk818 also supports a batter but I do not have one to
> > test or write the code for. When it is supported we can split off
> > the battery to its own document. Note that the battery is being added
> > in a separate commit series.
> > 
> > Changes from V1:
> > 
> >  - Removed generic descriptions.
> >  - Added maxItems to clock-output-names. Max items is 2 per the driver.
> >  - Added unevaluatedProperties as false to regulators.
> >  - Correct i2c node.
> >  - Added note about the battery.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Chris Morgan <macromorgan at hotmail.com>
> > ---
> >  .../devicetree/bindings/mfd/rk808.txt         | 465 ------------------
> >  .../bindings/mfd/rockchip,rk805.yaml          |  84 ++++
> >  .../bindings/mfd/rockchip,rk808.yaml          | 253 ++++++++++
> >  .../bindings/mfd/rockchip,rk809.yaml          |  98 ++++
> >  .../bindings/mfd/rockchip,rk817.yaml          | 362 ++++++++++++++
> >  .../bindings/mfd/rockchip,rk818.yaml          | 106 ++++
> >  6 files changed, 903 insertions(+), 465 deletions(-)
> >  delete mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/rk808.txt
> >  create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/rockchip,rk805.yaml
> >  create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/rockchip,rk808.yaml
> >  create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/rockchip,rk809.yaml
> >  create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/rockchip,rk817.yaml
> >  create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/rockchip,rk818.yaml
> > 
> 
> My bot found errors running 'make DT_CHECKER_FLAGS=-m dt_binding_check'
> on your patch (DT_CHECKER_FLAGS is new in v5.13):
> 
> yamllint warnings/errors:
> 
> dtschema/dtc warnings/errors:
> /builds/robherring/linux-dt-review/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/rockchip,rk808.example.dt.yaml: pmic at 1b: 'vddio-supply' does not match any of the regexes: 'pinctrl-[0-9]+'
> 	From schema: /builds/robherring/linux-dt-review/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/rockchip,rk808.yaml
> 
> doc reference errors (make refcheckdocs):
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/pinctrl-rk805.txt: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/rk808.txt
> 
> See https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/1529027
> 
> This check can fail if there are any dependencies. The base for a patch
> series is generally the most recent rc1.
> 
> If you already ran 'make dt_binding_check' and didn't see the above
> error(s), then make sure 'yamllint' is installed and dt-schema is up to
> date:
> 
> pip3 install dtschema --upgrade
> 
> Please check and re-submit.

What would be the best way to handle this? I can confirm that there
is no vddio cared for in the driver, however the datasheet appears
to show that one exists (vddio appears to be the supply for the
BUCK1 and BUCK2 DVS voltage). Should I update the yaml to reflect what
already exists today in the various device trees, should I only allow
what the driver cares for today, or should I "meet halfway" and allow
that which the datasheet permits (such as this) even if it's not
implemented in the driver? Note that there will also be some other
errors that are expected, because the existing device trees didn't
always follow the previous rk808.txt file (there is at least one board
with the wrong clock-cells value).

Thank you.

>