Re: [PATCH 2/2] dt-bindings: serial: samsung: include generic dtschema to match bluetooth child

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 05/03/2021 21:49, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 12, 2021 at 05:39:05PM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> Include the generic serial.yaml dtschema so the child node like
>> "bluetooh" will be properly matched:
>>
>>   arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos4210-universal_c210.dt.yaml:
>>     serial@13800000: 'bluetooth' does not match any of the regexes: 'pinctrl-[0-9]+'
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>>  .../bindings/serial/samsung_uart.yaml         | 26 ++++++++++++++++++-
>>  1 file changed, 25 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/samsung_uart.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/samsung_uart.yaml
>> index 3e29b561223d..f4faf32ab00f 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/samsung_uart.yaml
>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/samsung_uart.yaml
>> @@ -78,9 +78,11 @@ required:
>>    - interrupts
>>    - reg
>>  
>> -additionalProperties: false
>> +unevaluatedProperties: false
>>  
>>  allOf:
>> +  - $ref: /schemas/serial.yaml#
>> +
>>    - if:
>>        properties:
>>          compatible:
>> @@ -134,3 +136,25 @@ examples:
>>                   <&clocks SCLK_UART>;
>>          samsung,uart-fifosize = <16>;
>>      };
>> +
>> +  - |
>> +    #include <dt-bindings/clock/exynos4.h>
>> +    #include <dt-bindings/interrupt-controller/arm-gic.h>
>> +
>> +    serial@13800000 {
>> +        compatible = "samsung,exynos4210-uart";
>> +        reg = <0x13800000 0x100>;
>> +        interrupts = <GIC_SPI 52 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;
>> +        clocks = <&clock CLK_UART0>, <&clock CLK_SCLK_UART0>;
>> +        clock-names = "uart", "clk_uart_baud0";
>> +        dmas = <&pdma0 15>, <&pdma0 16>;
>> +        dma-names = "rx", "tx";
>> +        pinctrl-0 = <&uart0_data &uart0_fctl>;
>> +        pinctrl-names = "default";
>> +
>> +        bluetooth {
>> +            compatible = "brcm,bcm4330-bt";
> 
> Do we need a whole new example for this?

No, we don't need it. I find examples useful but if you prefer to have
them smaller, then I can skip it.

Best regards,
Krzysztof