Re: [PATCH v4] ASoC: dt-bindings: omap-mcpdm: Convert to DT schema

[Mithil]

Hey, before making a new patch I'll just list the changes that need to
be done according to this discussion.
Change maintainer
Change clocks to only include maxItems: 1
Change clock-names to include
items:
 - const: pdmclk
Use correct address in example
Use flags for interrupt in example

Best regards,
Mithil


On Sun, May 5, 2024 at 5:19 PM Mithil <bavishimithil@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Sun, May 5, 2024 at 5:02 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > On 05/05/2024 11:59, Mithil wrote:
> > >>>> Missing constraints, so replace it with maxItems: 1
> > >>> Similar to how clock-names are handled?
> > >>>
> > >>>> List the items. I asked to open existing bindings and take a look how it
> > >>>> is there. Existing bindings would show you how we code this part.
> > >>>   clock-names:
> > >>>     items:
> > >>>       - const: pdmclk
> > >>>     minItems: 1
> > >>>     maxItems: 1
> > >>> Something like this?
> > >>
> > >> No. Do you see code like this anywhere? Please only list the items,
> > >> although without context impossible to judge.
> > >>
> > > Quick search on sources gave me
> > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/dwc2.yaml
> >
> > Above code is different - it does not have maxItems, which you want to add.
> >
> > > which I used as reference for this prop
> > > clock-names:
> > >   description: Must be "pdmclk"
> >
> > Again, no, please list the items.
> > items:
> >  - const: foo
> Yep that was the old code for reference. Just items (no
> maxItems/minItems as well)
>
> > > compatible = "ti,omap4-mcpdm";
> > > reg = <0x40132000 0x7f>, /* MPU private access */
> > >         <0x49032000 0x7f>; /* L3 Interconnect */
> > > interrupts = <0 112 0x4>;
> > > Not really constants as they do change with platforms (omap4 vs 5 for
> > > example) but
> >
> > That is not really relevant... This is not pi or other math constant.
> >
> > > So do i just make up the constants for it then? Those just seem like
> > > magic numbers.
> >
> > Hm? Did you look around for other SoC nodes? 0 looks like SPI, 4 like
> > LEVEL_HIGH, but it depends on number of meaning of the interrupt cells,
> > so who is parent interrupt controller.
> >
> Ah the irq values, correct, I thought you meant the reg values.
> It should be <GIC_SPI 112 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; not sure about 112 though.
>
> I suppose these changes are enough right?
>
> Best regards,
> Mithil