Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-200467-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:45d1:ec00::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:45d1:ec00::1;
Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2024 12:51:47 +0200
From: Johan Hovold <johan@kernel.org>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>,
	Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@bgdev.pl>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>,
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@kernel.org>,
	Conor Dooley <conor+dt@kernel.org>,
	Wesley Cheng <quic_wcheng@quicinc.com>,
	linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, linux-usb@vger.kernel.org,
	devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@linaro.org>,
	Krishna Kurapati PSSNV <quic_kriskura@quicinc.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: usb: qcom,dwc3: set minItems for
 interrupt-names
Message-ID: <Zl7xw4ER-BBvcuct@hovoldconsulting.com>
References: <20240527144538.155704-1-brgl@bgdev.pl>
 <f709f17d-c20c-4777-b23b-8275f6d4f3f5@kernel.org>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <f709f17d-c20c-4777-b23b-8275f6d4f3f5@kernel.org>

On Mon, May 27, 2024 at 05:13:39PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 27/05/2024 16:45, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> > From: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@linaro.org>
> > 
> > There's a set of compatibles for which we set a strict list of 5 interrupt
> > names even though minItems for the interrupts property is 4. One of the
> > USB controllers on sa8775p only consumes 4 interrupts which leads to
> > dtbs_check errors. Make the last entry optional by setting minItems to 4.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@linaro.org>
> > ---
> >  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/qcom,dwc3.yaml | 1 +
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> 
> Can you also fix other cases? I found there at least two other. I missed
> that during review... or maybe we discussed it? I remember that commit
> was a pain :/

Yes, please make sure to fix those two remaining instances at the same
time.
 
> But be sure that this is what we actually want. Maybe intention was to
> have fixed number of interrupts (so no minItems in interrupts)?

I'm pretty sure the intention was to keep the SuperSpeed interrupts
optional.

Johan