Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [Linux-stm32] [PATCH v2 1/4] ASoC: dt-bindings: stm32: i2s: add audio-graph-card port | From | Alexandre TORGUE <> | Date | Wed, 8 Dec 2021 14:34:48 +0100 |
| |
On 12/8/21 1:08 PM, Lee Jones wrote: > On Wed, 08 Dec 2021, Alexandre TORGUE wrote: > >> Hi Ahmad >> >> On 12/7/21 2:59 PM, Ahmad Fatoum wrote: >>> Hello Alex, >>> >>> On 07.12.21 14:52, Alexandre TORGUE wrote: >>>> Hi Rob >>>> >>>> On 12/1/21 11:34 PM, Rob Herring wrote: >>>>> On Fri, Nov 26, 2021 at 11:25:27AM +0100, Olivier MOYSAN wrote: >>>>>> Hi Rob, >>>>>> >>>>>> On 11/25/21 10:26 PM, Rob Herring wrote: >>>>>>> On Thu, 25 Nov 2021 15:40:50 +0100, Olivier Moysan wrote: >>>>>>>> The STM2 I2S DAI can be connected via the audio-graph-card. >>>>>>>> Add port entry into the bindings. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Olivier Moysan <olivier.moysan@foss.st.com> >>>>>>>> --- >>>>>>>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sound/st,stm32-i2s.yaml | 5 +++++ >>>>>>>> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Running 'make dtbs_check' with the schema in this patch gives the >>>>>>> following warnings. Consider if they are expected or the schema is >>>>>>> incorrect. These may not be new warnings. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Note that it is not yet a requirement to have 0 warnings for dtbs_check. >>>>>>> This will change in the future. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Full log is available here: https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/1559750 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> audio-controller@4000b000: 'port' does not match any of the regexes: '^port@[0-9]', 'pinctrl-[0-9]+' >>>>>>> arch/arm/boot/dts/stm32mp157a-dk1.dt.yaml >>>>>>> arch/arm/boot/dts/stm32mp157c-dk2.dt.yaml >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> This warning is not a new one. >>>>>> >>>>>> The i2s2 node in stm32mp15xx-dkx.dtsi would require the following binding: >>>>>> port: >>>>>> $ref: audio-graph-port.yaml# >>>>>> unevaluatedProperties: false >>>>>> >>>>>> However the spi binding requires to introduce a unit address: >>>>>> patternProperties: >>>>>> '^port@[0-9]': >>>>>> $ref: audio-graph-port.yaml# >>>>>> unevaluatedProperties: false >>>>>> >>>>>> The warning can be removed by re-ordering the bindings patches in the serie, >>>>>> as "additionalProperties: true" makes the check more tolerant on extra >>>>>> properties. >>>>> >>>>> That's never right. >>>>> >>>>>> The patch "ASoC: dt-bindings: stm32: i2s: add audio-graph-card port" can >>>>>> even be merely dropped. >>>>>> So, I suggest to resend the serie without audio-graph-card patch. >>>>> >>>>> Only if you aren't using audio-graph-card. >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Does it sound too permissive to you ? >>>>> >>>>> I think perhaps you need to combine the schemas into 1. Or you need to >>>>> restructure your dtsi files such that you only add spi specific >>>>> properties when spi mode is enabled and only add i2s specific properties >>>>> when i2s mode is enabled. Or use the /delete-property/ directive. >>>> >>>> Initially the aim of this series was to fix a "make W=1" warnings seen on spi and i2s nodes (duplicate unit-address). Moving both nodes in a common node + using a different compatible depending on SPI or I2S usage sounded good) but it is not enough. In this series the common node is named as following: "spi2s2: spi@4000b000". It is fine for a spi usage but if we want to use this "common node" with I2S compatible and specific bindings, the node name remains spi@... and then specific spi checks are done. For this with this series applied we got this issue reported by spi-controller.yaml: >>>> >>>> spi@4000b000: port@0: 'compatible' is a required property >>>> >>>> So, if we use two separates nodes we got W=1 warning and if we use a common node we got yaml check issue. One possibility would be to use a common node with a new node name (for example i2spi@...) but I think it is not acceptable. >>>> >>>> How to progress ? >>> >>> Atmel Flexcom can be configured to be either UART, SPI or i2c. Functions >>> are child nodes of the flexcom node and the MFD driver matching against it, >>> just configure the operating mode and then calls of_platform_populate. >>> >>> Would something along these lines fit here as well? >> >> Yes it could but in my mind it was not a MFD as both feature cannot be used >> at the same time: it is either SPI or I2S and choice is done "statically" in >> device tree depending board usage. >> >> Lee, what it is your feeling about that ? Will you accept to add a MFD >> driver for this SPI/I2S peripheral whose prurpose is only to populate child >> node (either SPI or I2S) ? > > From your description, this doesn't sound like a good fit for MFD.
Thanks Lee for your quick answer. So rename the node frop spi@... to i2spi@... (or something else) looks like to be the only solution. Depending the compatible used the well schema will be used (if well referenced in each stm32 spi and i2s yaml files):
--> spi-controller.yaml in case of "st,stm32h7-spi"
-->audio-controller in case of "st,stm32h7-i2s"
Rob, do you agree?
regards alex
>
| |