Aw: Re: [PATCH v5 1/5] dt-bindings: ata: ahci-platform: Convert DT bindings to yaml

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 06/03/2022 10:47, Frank Wunderlich wrote:
> Hi Krzysztof,
> 
> have seen some warnings in Robs bot for arm.
> 
> imho have fixed them (and the indention you've mentioned already squashed) in my tree [1].
> 
>     add compatibles used together with generic-ahci
>       - marvell,berlin2-ahci

This is fine, just mention it in commit msg.

>       - qcom,apq8064-ahci
>       - qcom,ipq806x-ahci

These you need to consult with qcom-sata.txt. This could be a following
commit which will integrate qcom-sata.txt and remove it. Either you have
binding document for all devices or you create a common part, like for UFS:
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-devicetree/20220222145854.358646-1-krzysztof.kozlowski@canonical.com/
https://github.com/krzk/linux/commits/n/dt-bindings-ufs-v2

The choice depends more or less on complexity of bindings, IOW, how big
and complicated bindings would be if you combine everything to one YAML.

In the case of UFS, the devices differ - by clocks, resets, phys and
sometimes supplies. Therefore it easier to have one common shared part
and several device bindings.

AHCI looks more consistent - except that Qualcomm - so maybe better to
have one document.

>     increase reg-count to 2 (used in omap5-l4.dtsi)
>     increase clock-count to 5 (used in qcom-apq8064.dtsi)

This would need allOf+if.

> 
> can i still add you reviewed-by to v6?

Keeping reviewed-by would be fine when adding compatibles and bumping
maxItems, but in your case you need to rework these bindings. Either by
growing document with several "if:" or by splitting them, so it will be
significant change. Skip my review then.

> 
> [1] https://github.com/frank-w/BPI-R2-4.14/commits/5.17-next-20220225
> 
> regards Frank
> 
> 
>> Gesendet: Samstag, 05. März 2022 um 18:43 Uhr
>> Von: "Krzysztof Kozlowski" <krzysztof.kozlowski at canonical.com>
>>
>> Thanks for the changes, all look good except now I noticed that
>> indentation of example is unusual. It's not consistent. Starts with four
>> space (correct) but then goes to 7 spaces. Please adjust entire example
>> to use 4 spaces indentation.
>>
>> With that:
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski at canonical.com>
> 
> 


Best regards,
Krzysztof