From: Kanak Shilledar <[email protected]>
Convert the Broadcom BCM2835 SPI0 controller to newer DT
schema. Created DT schema based on the .txt file which had
`comaptible`, `reg`, `interrupts`, `clocks` as required
properties.
Added GPL-2.0 OR BSD-2-Clause License
Signed-off-by: Kanak Shilledar <[email protected]>
---
Changes in v3:
- Updated DCO email address
Changes in v2:
- Updated the maintainers
---
.../bindings/spi/brcm,bcm2835-spi.txt | 23 ---------
.../bindings/spi/brcm,bcm2835-spi.yaml | 50 +++++++++++++++++++
2 files changed, 50 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)
delete mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/brcm,bcm2835-spi.txt
create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/brcm,bcm2835-spi.yaml
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/brcm,bcm2835-spi.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/brcm,bcm2835-spi.txt
deleted file mode 100644
index 3d55dd64b1be..000000000000
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/brcm,bcm2835-spi.txt
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,23 +0,0 @@
-Broadcom BCM2835 SPI0 controller
-
-The BCM2835 contains two forms of SPI master controller, one known simply as
-SPI0, and the other known as the "Universal SPI Master"; part of the
-auxiliary block. This binding applies to the SPI0 controller.
-
-Required properties:
-- compatible: Should be one of "brcm,bcm2835-spi" for BCM2835/2836/2837 or
- "brcm,bcm2711-spi" for BCM2711 or "brcm,bcm7211-spi" for BCM7211.
-- reg: Should contain register location and length.
-- interrupts: Should contain interrupt.
-- clocks: The clock feeding the SPI controller.
-
-Example:
-
-spi@20204000 {
- compatible = "brcm,bcm2835-spi";
- reg = <0x7e204000 0x1000>;
- interrupts = <2 22>;
- clocks = <&clk_spi>;
- #address-cells = <1>;
- #size-cells = <0>;
-};
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/brcm,bcm2835-spi.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/brcm,bcm2835-spi.yaml
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..94da68792194
--- /dev/null
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/brcm,bcm2835-spi.yaml
@@ -0,0 +1,50 @@
+# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 OR BSD-2-Clause
+%YAML 1.2
+---
+$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/spi/brcm,bcm2835-spi.yaml#
+$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml#
+
+title: Broadcom BCM2835 SPI0 controller
+
+maintainers:
+ - Florian Fainelli <[email protected]>
+ - Kanak Shilledar <[email protected]>
+ - Stefan Wahren <[email protected]>
+
+allOf:
+ - $ref: spi-controller.yaml#
+
+properties:
+ compatible:
+ enum:
+ - brcm,bcm2835-spi
+ - brcm,bcm2711-spi
+ - brcm,bcm7211-spi
+
+ reg:
+ maxItems: 1
+
+ interrupts:
+ maxItems: 1
+
+ clocks:
+ maxItems: 1
+
+required:
+ - compatible
+ - reg
+ - interrupts
+ - clocks
+
+unevaluatedProperties: false
+
+examples:
+ - |
+ spi@20204000 {
+ compatible = "brcm,bcm2835-spi";
+ reg = <0x7e204000 0x1000>;
+ interrupts = <2 22>;
+ clocks = <&clk_spi>;
+ #address-cells = <1>;
+ #size-cells = <0>;
+ };
--
2.34.1
On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 12:30:47PM +0530, Kanak Shilledar wrote:
> Changes in v3:
> - Updated DCO email address
I was really hoping you'd tell me why you'd not used the same email
address, rather than just sending another version. My ulterior motive is
that I wrote the section in email-clients.rst saying that protonmail had
WKD issues with kernel.org accounts but apparently proton added a
workaround and have yet to be sent an email that confirmed that the
workaround fixed things. (I'm not sure that the WKD issues ever applied
as there's no GPG key posted for [email protected], only
[email protected]).
The patch is fine IMO though, so
Reviewed-by: Conor Dooley <[email protected]>
Cheers,
Conor.
On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 11:44 PM Conor Dooley <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 12:30:47PM +0530, Kanak Shilledar wrote:
>
> > Changes in v3:
> > - Updated DCO email address
>
> I was really hoping you'd tell me why you'd not used the same email
> address, rather than just sending another version. My ulterior motive is
> that I wrote the section in email-clients.rst saying that protonmail had
> WKD issues with kernel.org accounts but apparently proton added a
> workaround and have yet to be sent an email that confirmed that the
> workaround fixed things. (I'm not sure that the WKD issues ever applied
> as there's no GPG key posted for [email protected], only
> [email protected]).
Oh, I am primarily using protonmail and I am aware that there are some
issues with protonmail and kernel.org so for that reason I am sending my
patches via @gmail.com address. I was trying out some things with
gmail and proton so had changed my signing email address to @gmail.com
apart from sending emails I have no motive on using gmail.com account.
Also I am adding my protonmail account in the `CC`.
Hope this helps.
If this is not the intended route then I will change it and stick
to one email address.
> The patch is fine IMO though, so
> Reviewed-by: Conor Dooley <[email protected]>
Do I need to roll out another version with this reviewed by flag?
> Cheers,
> Conor.
Thanks and Regards
Kanak Shilledar
On Thu, May 16, 2024 at 12:00:29PM +0530, Kanak Shilledar wrote:
> On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 11:44 PM Conor Dooley <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 12:30:47PM +0530, Kanak Shilledar wrote:
> >
> > > Changes in v3:
> > > - Updated DCO email address
> >
> > I was really hoping you'd tell me why you'd not used the same email
> > address, rather than just sending another version. My ulterior motive is
> > that I wrote the section in email-clients.rst saying that protonmail had
> > WKD issues with kernel.org accounts but apparently proton added a
> > workaround and have yet to be sent an email that confirmed that the
> > workaround fixed things. (I'm not sure that the WKD issues ever applied
> > as there's no GPG key posted for [email protected], only
> > [email protected]).
>
> Oh, I am primarily using protonmail and I am aware that there are some
> issues with protonmail and kernel.org so for that reason I am sending my
> patches via @gmail.com address. I was trying out some things with
> gmail and proton so had changed my signing email address to @gmail.com
> apart from sending emails I have no motive on using gmail.com account.
> Also I am adding my protonmail account in the `CC`.
> Hope this helps.
> If this is not the intended route then I will change it and stick
> to one email address.
I don't care what email you use for stuff, that's your business. I just
want to know if we can remove the section from the docs that says not to
use proton. Maybe you could send me an off-list email to
[email protected] from your proton account, so I can see if it ends up
getting encrypted? That'd be helpful if you could.
> > The patch is fine IMO though, so
> > Reviewed-by: Conor Dooley <[email protected]>
>
> Do I need to roll out another version with this reviewed by flag?
No, Mark should be able to pick that up. There's usually no need to
resend patches solely pick up tags, that's the maintainer's
responsibility. If you're resending for any other reason, then yes, pick
up tags.
Cheers,
Conor.
On Thu, May 16, 2024 at 12:27 PM Conor Dooley
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Thu, May 16, 2024 at 12:00:29PM +0530, Kanak Shilledar wrote:
> > On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 11:44 PM Conor Dooley <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 12:30:47PM +0530, Kanak Shilledar wrote:
> > >
> > > > Changes in v3:
> > > > - Updated DCO email address
> > >
> > > I was really hoping you'd tell me why you'd not used the same email
> > > address, rather than just sending another version. My ulterior motive is
> > > that I wrote the section in email-clients.rst saying that protonmail had
> > > WKD issues with kernel.org accounts but apparently proton added a
> > > workaround and have yet to be sent an email that confirmed that the
> > > workaround fixed things. (I'm not sure that the WKD issues ever applied
> > > as there's no GPG key posted for [email protected], only
> > > [email protected]).
> >
> > Oh, I am primarily using protonmail and I am aware that there are some
> > issues with protonmail and kernel.org so for that reason I am sending my
> > patches via @gmail.com address. I was trying out some things with
> > gmail and proton so had changed my signing email address to @gmail.com
> > apart from sending emails I have no motive on using gmail.com account.
> > Also I am adding my protonmail account in the `CC`.
> > Hope this helps.
> > If this is not the intended route then I will change it and stick
> > to one email address.
>
> I don't care what email you use for stuff, that's your business. I just
> want to know if we can remove the section from the docs that says not to
> use proton. Maybe you could send me an off-list email to
> [email protected] from your proton account, so I can see if it ends up
> getting encrypted? That'd be helpful if you could.
I have sent you a mail off-list using proton. Please let me know if
you were able to view it?
There is a option to attach public key as well when using protonmail.
> > > The patch is fine IMO though, so
> > > Reviewed-by: Conor Dooley <[email protected]>
> >
> > Do I need to roll out another version with this reviewed by flag?
>
> No, Mark should be able to pick that up. There's usually no need to
> resend patches solely pick up tags, that's the maintainer's
> responsibility. If you're resending for any other reason, then yes, pick
> up tags.
Alright!
> Cheers,
> Conor.
Thanks and Regards,
Kanak Shilledar