RE: [PATCH v2 1/8] dt-bindings: iio: imu: Add inv_icm45600

[Remi Buisson]

>
>
>From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@xxxxxxxxxx> 
>Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2025 2:16 PM
>To: Remi Buisson <Remi.Buisson@xxxxxxx>; Jonathan Cameron <jic23@xxxxxxxxxx>; David Lechner <dlechner@xxxxxxxxxxxx>; Nuno Sá <nuno.sa@xxxxxxxxxx>; Andy Shevchenko <andy@xxxxxxxxxx>; Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx>; Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@xxxxxxxxxx>; Conor Dooley <conor+dt@xxxxxxxxxx>
>Cc: linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-iio@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/8] dt-bindings: iio: imu: Add inv_icm45600
>
>On 15/07/2025 10:35, Remi Buisson wrote:
>>>> +  drive-open-drain:
>>>> +    type: boolean
>>>> +
>>>> +  vdd-supply:
>>>> +    description: Regulator that provides power to the sensor
>>>> +
>>>> +  vddio-supply:
>>>> +    description: Regulator that provides power to the bus
>>>> +
>>>> +  mount-matrix:
>>>> +    description: an optional 3x3 mounting rotation matrix
>>>> +
>>>> +required:
>>>> +  - compatible
>>>> +  - reg
>>>> +  - interrupts
>>>> +  - interrupt-names
>>>
>>> Missing supplies
>> Are supplies always required ?
>> They are not present for invensense,icm426000 nor for st,lsm6dsx.
>
>Depends on the hardware... What does datasheet say? Which ones are optional?
>
>Other bindings are not good examples in this topic, because people tend
>to skip the supplies, reviewers and maintainers tend not to bother with
>nitpicking this.
Understood, VDD and VDDIO are actually mandatory.
I'll add them.
>
>
>>>
>>>> +
>>>> +allOf:
>>>> +  - $ref: /schemas/spi/spi-peripheral-props.yaml#
>>>> +
>>>> +unevaluatedProperties: false
>>>> +
>>>> +examples:
>>>> +  - |
>>>> +    #include <dt-bindings/gpio/gpio.h>
>>>> +    #include <dt-bindings/interrupt-controller/irq.h>
>>>> +    i2c {
>>>> +        #address-cells = <1>;
>>>> +        #size-cells = <0>;
>>>> +
>>>> +        icm45605@68 {
>>>
>>> It does not look like you tested the DTS against bindings. Please run
>>> `make dtbs_check W=1` (see
>>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/writing-schema.rst or
>>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.linaro.org/blog/tips-and-tricks-for-validating-devicetree-sources-with-the-devicetree-schema/__;!!FtrhtPsWDhZ6tw!Dse6zIqgRmQ8nxzdmpC7Uu96WBVwNWbql_4WnfPwjuISbauv7GGsDO2zSDTq4TEzSeb0s6fcbmFR$%5Blinaro%5B.%5Dorg%5D
>>>for instructions).
>>> Maybe you need to update your dtschema and yamllint. Don't rely on
>>> distro packages for dtschema and be sure you are using the latest
>>> released dtschema.
>>>
>>> (see how other bindings or DTS call this type of device)
>>>
>> I successfully ran "make dt_binding_check" with up-to-date testing branch.
>> I'll try dtbs_check as suggested, thanks!
>
>I am sorry. I think I pasted wrong template for a common issue.
>
>I wanted to say: you need generic name, imu etc. That's the template
>response should be there:
>
>Node names should be generic. See also an explanation and list of
>examples (not exhaustive) in DT specification:
>https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://devicetree-specification.readthedocs.io/en/latest/chapter2-devicetree-basics.html*generic-names-recommendation__;Iw!!FtrhtPsWDhZ6tw!DNZeP0a7fEex8t6jRU9hHDfJL3hXbiodPsB40bjewu_3nuUgfx6KyW65oDRKJDf9i7WfsEz6LwNa$[devicetree-specification[.]readthedocs[.]io]
>
>(and I use templates to streamline my review. Even though they might
>feel a bit robotic, without personal touch or patronizing, that's not
>their intention, I just optimize my process)
Thanks for the clarification, I'll use "imu" then.
Templates are totally ok :)
>
>
>Best regards,
>Krzysztof
>