This is the device tree bindings for new EDAC driver dmc520_edac.c.
Signed-off-by: Shiping Ji <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Lei Wang <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: James Morse <[email protected]>
---
Changes in v9:
- Replaced the vendor specific interrupt-config property with interrupt-names
---
.../devicetree/bindings/edac/arm-dmc520.txt | 22 +++++++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 22 insertions(+)
create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/edac/arm-dmc520.txt
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/edac/arm-dmc520.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/edac/arm-dmc520.txt
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..4a673f091918
--- /dev/null
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/edac/arm-dmc520.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,22 @@
+* ARM DMC-520 EDAC node
+
+Required properties:
+- compatible : "brcm,dmc-520", "arm,dmc-520".
+- reg : Address range of the DMC-520 registers.
+- interrupts : DMC-520 interrupt numbers. The example below specifies
+ two interrupt lines for dram_ecc_errc_int and
+ dram_ecc_errd_int.
+- interrupt-names : This is an array of names corresponding to the interrupt
+ line numbers. The valid interrupt names are the followings:
+ ram_ecc_errc, ram_ecc_errd, dram_ecc_errc, dram_ecc_errd,
+ failed_access, failed_prog, link_err, temperature_event,
+ arch_fsm, phy_request
+
+Example:
+
+dmc0: dmc@200000 {
+ compatible = "brcm,dmc-520", "arm,dmc-520";
+ reg = <0x200000 0x80000>;
+ interrupts = <0x0 0x349 0x4>, <0x0 0x34B 0x4>;
+ interrupt-names = "dram_ecc_errc", "dram_ecc_errd";
+};
--
2.17.1
On Wed, 15 Jan 2020 06:32:27 -0800, Shiping Ji wrote:
> This is the device tree bindings for new EDAC driver dmc520_edac.c.
>
> Signed-off-by: Shiping Ji <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Lei Wang <[email protected]>
> Reviewed-by: James Morse <[email protected]>
>
> ---
> Changes in v9:
> - Replaced the vendor specific interrupt-config property with interrupt-names
>
> ---
> .../devicetree/bindings/edac/arm-dmc520.txt | 22 +++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+)
> create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/edac/arm-dmc520.txt
>
Reviewed-by: Rob Herring <[email protected]>
On Wed, Jan 15, 2020 at 06:32:27AM -0800, Shiping Ji wrote:
> This is the device tree bindings for new EDAC driver dmc520_edac.c.
>
> Signed-off-by: Shiping Ji <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Lei Wang <[email protected]>
> Reviewed-by: James Morse <[email protected]>
So for this patch, v2 had Rui Zhao as an author:
https://lkml.kernel.org/r/BN7PR08MB5572B3388B2D7DC8F6C7F285AE4C0@BN7PR08MB5572.namprd08.prod.outlook.com
v3 got Lei as an author:
https://lkml.kernel.org/r/CY1PR0401MB1244062C1738B09D6100F202860A0@CY1PR0401MB1244.namprd04.prod.outlook.com
and now it is you.
So when you send next time, think about who's going to be the author.
> + line numbers. The valid interrupt names are the followings:
WARNING: 'followings' may be misspelled - perhaps 'following'?
#51: FILE: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/edac/arm-dmc520.txt:10:
+ line numbers. The valid interrupt names are the followings:
Please integrate scripts/checkpatch.pl into your patch creation
workflow. Some of the warnings/errors *actually* make sense.
Also, this patch throws this other checkpatch warning:
WARNING: DT bindings should be in DT schema format. See: Documentation/devicetree/writing-schema.rst
but since Rob reviewed it, I'm going to assume checkpatch is wrong here.
Thx.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
On 1/16/2020 3:39 PM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 15, 2020 at 06:32:27AM -0800, Shiping Ji wrote:
>> This is the device tree bindings for new EDAC driver dmc520_edac.c.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Shiping Ji <[email protected]>
>> Signed-off-by: Lei Wang <[email protected]>
>> Reviewed-by: James Morse <[email protected]>
>
> So for this patch, v2 had Rui Zhao as an author:
>
> https://lkml.kernel.org/r/BN7PR08MB5572B3388B2D7DC8F6C7F285AE4C0@BN7PR08MB5572.namprd08.prod.outlook.com
>
> v3 got Lei as an author:
>
> https://lkml.kernel.org/r/CY1PR0401MB1244062C1738B09D6100F202860A0@CY1PR0401MB1244.namprd04.prod.outlook.com
>
> and now it is you.
>
> So when you send next time, think about who's going to be the author.
I'll make sure Lei is the author (From:) in the next patches.
>> + line numbers. The valid interrupt names are the followings:
>
> WARNING: 'followings' may be misspelled - perhaps 'following'?
> #51: FILE: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/edac/arm-dmc520.txt:10:
> + line numbers. The valid interrupt names are the followings:
Yes, I think this can be fixed. I checked the scripts/spelling.txt and it does suggest using 'following' instead.
> Please integrate scripts/checkpatch.pl into your patch creation
> workflow. Some of the warnings/errors *actually* make sense.
Yes, we will.
> Also, this patch throws this other checkpatch warning:
>
> WARNING: DT bindings should be in DT schema format. See: Documentation/devicetree/writing-schema.rst
>
> but since Rob reviewed it, I'm going to assume checkpatch is wrong here.
>
> Thx.
The check seems to warn the next file in .txt format which should be rather in the new .yaml format. We'll try to make one next.
Thanks!
--
Best regards,
Shiping Ji
On Thu, Jan 16, 2020 at 5:39 PM Borislav Petkov <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jan 15, 2020 at 06:32:27AM -0800, Shiping Ji wrote:
> > This is the device tree bindings for new EDAC driver dmc520_edac.c.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Shiping Ji <[email protected]>
> > Signed-off-by: Lei Wang <[email protected]>
> > Reviewed-by: James Morse <[email protected]>
>
> So for this patch, v2 had Rui Zhao as an author:
>
> https://lkml.kernel.org/r/BN7PR08MB5572B3388B2D7DC8F6C7F285AE4C0@BN7PR08MB5572.namprd08.prod.outlook.com
>
> v3 got Lei as an author:
>
> https://lkml.kernel.org/r/CY1PR0401MB1244062C1738B09D6100F202860A0@CY1PR0401MB1244.namprd04.prod.outlook.com
>
> and now it is you.
>
> So when you send next time, think about who's going to be the author.
>
> > + line numbers. The valid interrupt names are the followings:
>
> WARNING: 'followings' may be misspelled - perhaps 'following'?
> #51: FILE: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/edac/arm-dmc520.txt:10:
> + line numbers. The valid interrupt names are the followings:
>
> Please integrate scripts/checkpatch.pl into your patch creation
> workflow. Some of the warnings/errors *actually* make sense.
>
> Also, this patch throws this other checkpatch warning:
>
> WARNING: DT bindings should be in DT schema format. See: Documentation/devicetree/writing-schema.rst
>
> but since Rob reviewed it, I'm going to assume checkpatch is wrong here.
Would be happy for a schema, but not going to ask for that on a v9.
Rob
On 1/21/2020 9:53 AM, Rob Herring wrote:
> Would be happy for a schema, but not going to ask for that on a v9.
I drafted the schema, do you have some tools/instrutions to validate against the DTS? I want to make sure the schema is indeed correct.
Thanks!
--
Best regards,
Shiping Ji