MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20230124222023.316089-1-robh@kernel.org> <Y9EyB+OO7MyGy20w@e120937-lin>
 <20230125141113.kkbowopusikuogx6@bogus> <Y9JLUIioxFPn4BS0@e120937-lin>
 <20230126144647.6q3qlu5sqz27cmyc@bogus> <CAL_JsqLxBAB103vgCUOwW4SkAApm6_=Ace7EFWMSDFKDzJaKpQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20230126170412.4ytcky6a7lnll6it@bogus> <CAL_JsqJcrmf2fYVC0TnNY_MZvajJxqXPdVFwLf9MZ2XO=VZ1Lw@mail.gmail.com>
 <20230206104704.xe72srqygepguuk2@bogus>
In-Reply-To: <20230206104704.xe72srqygepguuk2@bogus>
From:   Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>
Date:   Mon, 6 Feb 2023 11:22:38 -0600
Message-ID: <CAL_JsqK9dzohSW_035Y8F2DRMZLjmwd-Hq=c2sqM95ofWRTj8w@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: firmware: arm,scmi: Restrict protocol child
 node properties
To:     Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
Cc:     Cristian Marussi <cristian.marussi@arm.com>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org>,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Feb 6, 2023 at 4:47 AM Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Rob,
>
> On Fri, Jan 27, 2023 at 12:52:33PM -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
> >
> > TBC, 'protocol@.*' would not allow anything but the properties defined
> > in the /$defs/protocol-node. So [1] would throw errors without a
> > schema addition.
>
> Right I clearly missed that, somehow I assumed it would allow.
>
> > We should either do that along with dropping 'protocol@18' or we keep
> > protocol 0x18 node and add all other providerless protocols. I don't
> > think we need the latter to just check unit-address vs. reg.
>
> I only argument today it to allow protocol specific transport. So we could
> delay addition of it until someone needs that way. So far we haven't seen
> anyone using it other than performance(even that is not needed with the
> introduction of fast channels that are auto discoverable in relatively
> newer versions of the spec).

I failed to think about 'protocol@.*' would match on every protocol,
so we have to list them explicitly: '^protocol@(18|xx|yy|zz)$'

Anyways, I think the conclusion is the patch should stay as-is and so
I've applied it.

Rob