On 11/05/2022 17:53, Nicolas Frattaroli wrote:
> The RK3568 and RK3566 have a Hantro VPU node solely dedicated to
> encoding. This patch adds a compatible for it, and also allows
> the bindings to only come with a vepu interrupt.
>
> Signed-off-by: Nicolas Frattaroli <[email protected]>
> ---
> .../devicetree/bindings/media/rockchip-vpu.yaml | 17 ++++++++++++++++-
> 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/rockchip-vpu.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/rockchip-vpu.yaml
> index bacb60a34989..965ca80b5cea 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/rockchip-vpu.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/rockchip-vpu.yaml
> @@ -22,6 +22,7 @@ properties:
> - rockchip,rk3288-vpu
> - rockchip,rk3328-vpu
> - rockchip,rk3399-vpu
> + - rockchip,rk3568-vepu
> - rockchip,px30-vpu
> - items:
> - const: rockchip,rk3188-vpu
> @@ -39,7 +40,9 @@ properties:
>
> interrupt-names:
> oneOf:
> - - const: vdpu
> + - enum:
> + - vdpu
> + - vepu
> - items:
> - const: vepu
> - const: vdpu
> @@ -76,6 +79,18 @@ required:
>
> additionalProperties: false
>
> +allOf:
> + # compatibles that end in -vepu should only have the vepu interrupt
> + - if:
> + properties:
> + compatible:
> + contains:
> + pattern: "^[a-zA-Z0-9\\-,_.]+\\-vepu$"
Why not listing the compatible how I asked? This is the common way of
handling allOf:if:then per variant.
https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email protected]/
Your patches do not apply on next, so the set might not have been tested
by Rob's bot.
Best regards,
Krzysztof
On Mittwoch, 11. Mai 2022 18:00:09 CEST Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 11/05/2022 17:53, Nicolas Frattaroli wrote:
> > The RK3568 and RK3566 have a Hantro VPU node solely dedicated to
> > encoding. This patch adds a compatible for it, and also allows
> > the bindings to only come with a vepu interrupt.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Nicolas Frattaroli <[email protected]>
> > ---
> > .../devicetree/bindings/media/rockchip-vpu.yaml | 17 ++++++++++++++++-
> > 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/rockchip-vpu.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/rockchip-vpu.yaml
> > index bacb60a34989..965ca80b5cea 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/rockchip-vpu.yaml
> > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/rockchip-vpu.yaml
> > @@ -22,6 +22,7 @@ properties:
> > - rockchip,rk3288-vpu
> > - rockchip,rk3328-vpu
> > - rockchip,rk3399-vpu
> > + - rockchip,rk3568-vepu
> > - rockchip,px30-vpu
> > - items:
> > - const: rockchip,rk3188-vpu
> > @@ -39,7 +40,9 @@ properties:
> >
> > interrupt-names:
> > oneOf:
> > - - const: vdpu
> > + - enum:
> > + - vdpu
> > + - vepu
> > - items:
> > - const: vepu
> > - const: vdpu
> > @@ -76,6 +79,18 @@ required:
> >
> > additionalProperties: false
> >
> > +allOf:
> > + # compatibles that end in -vepu should only have the vepu interrupt
> > + - if:
> > + properties:
> > + compatible:
> > + contains:
> > + pattern: "^[a-zA-Z0-9\\-,_.]+\\-vepu$"
>
> Why not listing the compatible how I asked? This is the common way of
> handling allOf:if:then per variant.
Because I was afraid that if this wasn't general enough to apply to all
future vepu-only instances of Hantro, then my patch might be bikeshed
into requiring a v4. Clearly, my worries had the opposite effect.
Also because I thought it was cool to use a pattern for this to enforce
consistent naming in the bindings.
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email protected]/
>
> Your patches do not apply on next, so the set might not have been tested
> by Rob's bot.
Good to know. Once I send out v4 in a few days and maybe after some more
opinions so I can stop bombarding the mailing list with tiny revisions
of the same patch set, I will base it on linux-next.
I'm happy to report though that this passes dt_binding_check with W=1
without adding any new warnings. I do actually run those checks (and
checkpatch) before submitting.
>
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof
>
Regards,
Nicolas Frattaroli