Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::3:7 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::3:7;
Date:   Wed, 4 Oct 2023 09:36:20 +0200
From:   Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@bootlin.com>
To:     Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org>
Cc:     devicetree@vger.kernel.org, Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>,
        Tom Rini <trini@konsulko.com>,
        U-Boot Mailing List <u-boot@lists.denx.de>,
        linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, Conor Dooley <conor+dt@kernel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org>,
        Pratyush Yadav <ptyadav@amazon.de>,
        =?UTF-8?B?UmFmYcWCIE1pxYJlY2tp?= <rafal@milecki.pl>,
        Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
        Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@ti.com>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] dt-bindings: mtd: fixed-partitions: Add binman
 compatible
Message-ID: <20231004093620.2b1d6917@xps-13>
In-Reply-To: <20231002174948.1015223-1-sjg@chromium.org>
References: <20231002174948.1015223-1-sjg@chromium.org>
Organization: Bootlin
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: bulk

Hi Simon,

sjg@chromium.org wrote on Mon,  2 Oct 2023 11:49:40 -0600:

> Add a compatible string for binman, so we can extend fixed-partitions
> in various ways.

I've been thinking at the proper way to describe the binman partitions.
I am wondering if we should really extend the fixed-partitions
schema. This description is really basic and kind of supposed to remain
like that. Instead, I wonder if we should not just keep the binman
compatible alone, like many others already. This way it would be very clear
what is expected and allowed in both cases. I am thinking about
something like that:

	Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mtd/partitions/brcm,bcm4908-partitions.y=
aml=20

this file is also referenced there (but this patch does the same, which
is what I'd expect):

	Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mtd/partitions/partitions.yaml

I'll let the binding maintainers judge whether they think it's
relevant, it's not a strong opposition.

> Signed-off-by: Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org>
> ---

[...]

> +properties:
> +  compatible:
> +    const: binman

Right now this does not fit (I believe) the example. But if we no
longer extend fixed-partitions but just create binman.yaml, this will
probably be enough.

> +
> +additionalProperties: false
> +
> +examples:
> +  - |
> +    partitions {
> +        compatible =3D "binman", "fixed-partitions";
> +        #address-cells =3D <1>;
> +        #size-cells =3D <1>;
> +
> +        partition@100000 {
> +            label =3D "u-boot";
> +            reg =3D <0x100000 0xf00000>;
> +        };
> +    };

Thanks,
Miqu=C3=A8l