On 20/06/2023 11:34, Sergio Paracuellos wrote:
> Add YAML documentation for the timer which is present on Ralink SoCs.
If there is going to be new version:
A nit, subject: drop second/last, redundant "documentation". The
"dt-bindings" prefix is already stating that these are bindings in
documentation.
>
> Signed-off-by: Sergio Paracuellos <[email protected]>
> ---
> .../bindings/timer/ralink,rt2880-timer.yaml | 49 +++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 49 insertions(+)
> create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/timer/ralink,rt2880-timer.yaml
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/timer/ralink,rt2880-timer.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/timer/ralink,rt2880-timer.yaml
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000000..9a315449f73e
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/timer/ralink,rt2880-timer.yaml
> @@ -0,0 +1,49 @@
> +# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause)
> +%YAML 1.2
> +---
> +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/timer/ralink,rt2880-timer.yaml#
> +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml#
> +
> +title: Timer present in Ralink family SoCs
> +
> +maintainers:
> + - Sergio Paracuellos <[email protected]>
> +
> +properties:
> + compatible:
> + const: ralink,rt2880-timer
> +
> + reg:
> + maxItems: 1
> +
> + clocks:
> + maxItems: 1
> +
> + clock-names:
> + const: timer
Names matching the module name are not really helpful, so drop it,
unless any existing user needs it.
> +
> + interrupts:
> + maxItems: 1
> +
Best regards,
Krzysztof
Hi Krzysztof,
On Tue, Jun 20, 2023 at 11:40 AM Krzysztof Kozlowski
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On 20/06/2023 11:34, Sergio Paracuellos wrote:
> > Add YAML documentation for the timer which is present on Ralink SoCs.
>
> If there is going to be new version:
> A nit, subject: drop second/last, redundant "documentation". The
> "dt-bindings" prefix is already stating that these are bindings in
> documentation.
Understood, thanks.
>
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Sergio Paracuellos <[email protected]>
> > ---
> > .../bindings/timer/ralink,rt2880-timer.yaml | 49 +++++++++++++++++++
> > 1 file changed, 49 insertions(+)
> > create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/timer/ralink,rt2880-timer.yaml
> >
> > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/timer/ralink,rt2880-timer.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/timer/ralink,rt2880-timer.yaml
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 000000000000..9a315449f73e
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/timer/ralink,rt2880-timer.yaml
> > @@ -0,0 +1,49 @@
> > +# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause)
> > +%YAML 1.2
> > +---
> > +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/timer/ralink,rt2880-timer.yaml#
> > +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml#
> > +
> > +title: Timer present in Ralink family SoCs
> > +
> > +maintainers:
> > + - Sergio Paracuellos <[email protected]>
> > +
> > +properties:
> > + compatible:
> > + const: ralink,rt2880-timer
> > +
> > + reg:
> > + maxItems: 1
> > +
> > + clocks:
> > + maxItems: 1
> > +
> > + clock-names:
> > + const: timer
>
> Names matching the module name are not really helpful, so drop it,
> unless any existing user needs it.
I am ok with dropping this. If you meant with an existing user
something that is already mainlined in the kernel tree then I would
say there is no need for this 'clock-names'. I don't know about other
places since these SoCs are pretty old and almost with nothing
documented. I am doing the effort of trying to document all the stuff
before porting some openWRT device tree files to the kernel (this
timer driver is already included in 'arch/mips/ralink' so I am
documenting already in-tree things). So I guess I should send v2
removing this?
Thanks,
Sergio Paracuellos
>
> > +
> > + interrupts:
> > + maxItems: 1
> > +
>
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof
>
On 20/06/2023 11:51, Sergio Paracuellos wrote:
>>> + reg:
>>> + maxItems: 1
>>> +
>>> + clocks:
>>> + maxItems: 1
>>> +
>>> + clock-names:
>>> + const: timer
>>
>> Names matching the module name are not really helpful, so drop it,
>> unless any existing user needs it.
>
> I am ok with dropping this. If you meant with an existing user
> something that is already mainlined in the kernel tree then I would
Yes.
> say there is no need for this 'clock-names'. I don't know about other
> places since these SoCs are pretty old and almost with nothing
> documented. I am doing the effort of trying to document all the stuff
> before porting some openWRT device tree files to the kernel (this
> timer driver is already included in 'arch/mips/ralink' so I am
> documenting already in-tree things). So I guess I should send v2
> removing this?
Yes, please.
Best regards,
Krzysztof