Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Message-ID: <da82e71f-e32c-7adb-250e-0c80cc6e30bd@ti.com>
Date:   Fri, 19 Aug 2022 15:59:13 +0530
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/91.11.0
CC:     <davem@davemloft.net>, <edumazet@google.com>, <kuba@kernel.org>,
        <pabeni@redhat.com>, <robh+dt@kernel.org>, <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
        <vladimir.oltean@nxp.com>, <grygorii.strashko@ti.com>,
        <vigneshr@ti.com>, <nsekhar@ti.com>, <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
        <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        <kishon@ti.com>, <s-vadapalli@ti.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/3] dt-bindings: net: ti: k3-am654-cpsw-nuss: Update
 bindings for J7200 CPSW5G
Content-Language: en-US
To:     Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>,
        <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org>
References: <20220816060139.111934-1-s-vadapalli@ti.com>
 <20220816060139.111934-2-s-vadapalli@ti.com>
 <79e58157-f8f2-6ca8-1aa6-b5cf6c83d9e6@linaro.org>
 <31c3a5b0-17cc-ad7b-6561-5834cac62d3e@ti.com>
 <9c331cdc-e34a-1146-fb83-84c2107b2e2a@linaro.org>
 <176ab999-e274-e22a-97d8-31f655b16800@ti.com>
From:   Siddharth Vadapalli <s-vadapalli@ti.com>
In-Reply-To: <176ab999-e274-e22a-97d8-31f655b16800@ti.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

Hello Krzysztof,

On 17/08/22 13:11, Siddharth Vadapalli wrote:
> Hello Krzysztof,
> 
> On 17/08/22 11:20, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 17/08/2022 08:14, Siddharth Vadapalli wrote:
>>
>>>>> -      port@[1-2]:
>>>>> +      "^port@[1-4]$":
>>>>>          type: object
>>>>>          description: CPSWxG NUSS external ports
>>>>>  
>>>>> @@ -119,7 +120,7 @@ properties:
>>>>>          properties:
>>>>>            reg:
>>>>>              minimum: 1
>>>>> -            maximum: 2
>>>>> +            maximum: 4
>>>>>              description: CPSW port number
>>>>>  
>>>>>            phys:
>>>>> @@ -151,6 +152,18 @@ properties:
>>>>>  
>>>>>      additionalProperties: false
>>>>>  
>>>>> +if:
>>>>
>>>> This goes under allOf just before unevaluated/additionalProperties:false
>>>
>>> allOf was added by me in v3 series patch and it is not present in the
>>> file. I removed it in v4 after Rob Herring's suggestion. Please let me
>>> know if simply moving the if-then statements to the line above
>>> additionalProperties:false would be fine.
>>
>> I think Rob's comment was focusing not on using or not-using allOf, but
>> on format of your entire if-then-else. Your v3 was huge and included
>> allOf in wrong place).
>>
>> Now you add if-then in proper place, but it is still advisable to put it
>> with allOf, so if ever you grow the if-then by new entry, you do not
>> have to change the indentation.
>>
>> Anyway the location is not correct. Regardless if this is if-then or
>> allOf-if-then, put it just like example schema is suggesting.
> 
> I will move the if-then statements to the lines above the
> "additionalProperties: false" line. Also, I will add an allOf for this

I had a look at the example at [1] and it uses allOf after the
"additionalProperties: false" line. Would it be fine then for me to add
allOf and the single if-then statement below the "additionalProperties:
false" line? Please let me know.

[1] -> https://github.com/devicetree-org/dt-schema/blob/mai/test/schemas/conditionals-allof-example.yaml

Regards,
Siddharth.