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;
Date:   Thu, 27 Oct 2022 04:25:53 +0300
From:   Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@gmail.com>
To:     Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>
Cc:     Colin Foster <colin.foster@in-advantage.com>,
        linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
        Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>,
        Claudiu Manoil <claudiu.manoil@nxp.com>,
        John Crispin <john@phrozen.org>,
        Sean Wang <sean.wang@mediatek.com>,
        DENG Qingfang <dqfext@gmail.com>,
        Landen Chao <Landen.Chao@mediatek.com>,
        =?utf-8?B?bsOnIMOcTkFM?= <arinc.unal@arinc9.com>,
        Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@gmail.com>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>,
        Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@gmail.com>,
        Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org>,
        Lee Jones <lee@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 net-next 3/7] dt-bindings: net: dsa: qca8k: utilize
 shared dsa.yaml
Message-ID: <20221027012553.zb3zjwmw3x6kw566@skbuf>
References: <20221025050355.3979380-1-colin.foster@in-advantage.com>
 <20221025050355.3979380-4-colin.foster@in-advantage.com>
 <20221025050355.3979380-1-colin.foster@in-advantage.com>
 <20221025050355.3979380-4-colin.foster@in-advantage.com>
 <20221025212114.GA3322299-robh@kernel.org>
 <20221025212114.GA3322299-robh@kernel.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20221025212114.GA3322299-robh@kernel.org>
 <20221025212114.GA3322299-robh@kernel.org>
Precedence: bulk

Hi Rob,

On Tue, Oct 25, 2022 at 04:21:14PM -0500, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 24, 2022 at 10:03:51PM -0700, Colin Foster wrote:
> > The dsa.yaml binding contains duplicated bindings for address and size
> > cells, as well as the reference to dsa-port.yaml. Instead of duplicating
> > this information, remove the reference to dsa-port.yaml and include the
> > full reference to dsa.yaml.
> 
> I don't think this works without further restructuring. Essentially, 
> 'unevaluatedProperties' on works on a single level. So every level has 
> to define all properties at that level either directly in 
> properties/patternProperties or within a $ref.
> 
> See how graph.yaml is structured and referenced for an example how this 
> has to work.
> 
> > @@ -104,8 +98,6 @@ patternProperties:
> >                SGMII on the QCA8337, it is advised to set this unless a communication
> >                issue is observed.
> >  
> > -        unevaluatedProperties: false
> > -
> 
> Dropping this means any undefined properties in port nodes won't be an 
> error. Once I fix all the issues related to these missing, there will be 
> a meta-schema checking for this (this could be one I fixed already).

I may be misreading, but here, "unevaluatedProperties: false" from dsa.yaml
(under patternProperties: "^(ethernet-)?port@[0-9]+$":) is on the same
level as the "unevaluatedProperties: false" that Colin is deleting.

In fact, I believe that it is precisely due to the "unevaluatedProperties: false"
from dsa.yaml that this is causing a failure now:

net/dsa/qca8k.example.dtb: switch@10: ports:port@6: Unevaluated properties are not allowed ('qca,sgmii-rxclk-falling-edge' was unexpected)

Could you please explain why is the 'qca,sgmii-rxclk-falling-edge'
property not evaluated from the perspective of dsa.yaml in the example?
It's a head scratcher to me.

May it have something to do with the fact that Colin's addition:

$ref: "dsa.yaml#"

is not expressed as:

allOf:
  - $ref: "dsa.yaml#"

?

If yes, can you explain exactly what is the difference with respect to
unevaluatedProperties?

> >  oneOf:
> >    - required:
> >        - ports
> > @@ -116,7 +108,7 @@ required:
> >    - compatible
> >    - reg
> >  
> > -additionalProperties: true
> 
> This should certainly be changed though. We should only have 'true' for 
> incomplete collections of properties. IOW, for common bindings.
> 
> > +unevaluatedProperties: false