diff mbox series

[5/5] scsi: dt-bindings: ufs: qcom: Fix warning for sdm845 by adding reg-names

Message ID 20230623113009.2512206-6-abel.vesa@linaro.org
State New
Headers show
Series scsi: dt-bindings: ufs: qcom: Some fixes to clear all dtbs_check warnings | expand

Commit Message

Abel Vesa June 23, 2023, 11:30 a.m. UTC
There is a warning on dtbs check for sdm845, amongst other platforms,
about the reg-names being unevaluated. Fix that by adding reg-names to
the clocks and reg properties check for such platforms.

Fixes: 462c5c0aa798 ("dt-bindings: ufs: qcom,ufs: convert to dtschema")
Signed-off-by: Abel Vesa <abel.vesa@linaro.org>
---
 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ufs/qcom,ufs.yaml | 4 ++++
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)

Comments

Krzysztof Kozlowski June 23, 2023, 12:31 p.m. UTC | #1
On 23/06/2023 13:30, Abel Vesa wrote:
> There is a warning on dtbs check for sdm845, amongst other platforms,
> about the reg-names being unevaluated. Fix that by adding reg-names to
> the clocks and reg properties check for such platforms.
> 
> Fixes: 462c5c0aa798 ("dt-bindings: ufs: qcom,ufs: convert to dtschema")
> Signed-off-by: Abel Vesa <abel.vesa@linaro.org>
> ---
>  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ufs/qcom,ufs.yaml | 4 ++++
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ufs/qcom,ufs.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ufs/qcom,ufs.yaml
> index 0209713d1f88..894b57117314 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ufs/qcom,ufs.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ufs/qcom,ufs.yaml
> @@ -166,6 +166,10 @@ allOf:
>          reg:
>            minItems: 2
>            maxItems: 2
> +        reg-names:
> +          items:
> +            - const: std
> +            - const: ice

reg-names looks like a new property, so it should be defined in
top-level and just constrained per-variant.

Also there was similar approach:
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20221209-dt-binding-ufs-v2-2-dc7a04699579@fairphone.com/

but I guess no resends and it can be superseded.

Best regards,
Krzysztof
Krzysztof Kozlowski June 24, 2023, 7:49 a.m. UTC | #2
On 23/06/2023 23:17, Rob Herring wrote:
>> With my private mailbox I just have a different folder for patches that
>> have been sent which I archive once they're applied, but with work GMail
>> I don't see how I can easily replicate this since it's also not grouping
>> threads properly.
> 
> Yeah, GMail sucks for that. I use 'lei' to get all my patches and 
> replies to them (though its caching will miss replies). Then I delete 
> them from the mbox when they are applied or otherwise finished. lei 
> updates won't re-add them to the mbox.

That's interesting approach. What's your lei search query for getting
your patches? "f:rob" would get all your threads you participated in.

Best regards,
Krzysztof
James Bottomley June 24, 2023, 12:30 p.m. UTC | #3
On Fri, 2023-06-23 at 14:38 +0200, Luca Weiss wrote:
> With my private mailbox I just have a different folder for patches
> that have been sent which I archive once they're applied, but with
> work GMail I don't see how I can easily replicate this since it's
> also not grouping threads properly.

I have something similar, but instead of multiple folders, I use imap
labels to achieve the same thing (and then evolution search folders to
sort out the labels).  I believe GMail has some primitive labelling
system that actually works (unlike exchange), so you might be able to
get a scheme like that to work.

For my mobile phone, which doesn't have the sophisticated search
folders evolution does, I use dovecot virtual folders to achieve the
same effect.  I'm afraid I don't think GMail has any equivalent of
this.

James
Luca Weiss June 26, 2023, 6:38 a.m. UTC | #4
Hi Rob,

On Fri Jun 23, 2023 at 11:17 PM CEST, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 23, 2023 at 02:38:04PM +0200, Luca Weiss wrote:
> > On Fri Jun 23, 2023 at 2:31 PM CEST, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > > On 23/06/2023 13:30, Abel Vesa wrote:
> > > > There is a warning on dtbs check for sdm845, amongst other platforms,
> > > > about the reg-names being unevaluated. Fix that by adding reg-names to
> > > > the clocks and reg properties check for such platforms.
> > > > 
> > > > Fixes: 462c5c0aa798 ("dt-bindings: ufs: qcom,ufs: convert to dtschema")
> > > > Signed-off-by: Abel Vesa <abel.vesa@linaro.org>
> > > > ---
> > > >  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ufs/qcom,ufs.yaml | 4 ++++
> > > >  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
> > > > 
> > > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ufs/qcom,ufs.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ufs/qcom,ufs.yaml
> > > > index 0209713d1f88..894b57117314 100644
> > > > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ufs/qcom,ufs.yaml
> > > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ufs/qcom,ufs.yaml
> > > > @@ -166,6 +166,10 @@ allOf:
> > > >          reg:
> > > >            minItems: 2
> > > >            maxItems: 2
> > > > +        reg-names:
> > > > +          items:
> > > > +            - const: std
> > > > +            - const: ice
> > >
> > > reg-names looks like a new property, so it should be defined in
> > > top-level and just constrained per-variant.
> > >
> > > Also there was similar approach:
> > > https://lore.kernel.org/all/20221209-dt-binding-ufs-v2-2-dc7a04699579@fairphone.com/
> > >
> > > but I guess no resends and it can be superseded.
> > 
> > Right, the patches got reviews but was never applied... I really need to
> > find a strategy to keep track of sent patches until they're applied with
> > my work mailbox, it's not the first time that a patch has gotten
> > forgotten.
>
> There was an error reported on the above series. Why would it be 
> applied?

The error report at [0] complains about reg-names but I'm quite sure
that patch 2/3 resolves this error. Does your bot only apply one patch
at a time and run the check or apply all of them and then run it? It's
been a while but I'm fairly sure I ran all of the checks before sending
since I also documented some other patches in the cover letter there.

[0] https://lore.kernel.org/all/167241769341.1925758.17856681634949446114.robh@kernel.org/

>
> That said, I'm not sure SCSI maintainers consistently apply DT only 
> patch series.
>
> > With my private mailbox I just have a different folder for patches that
> > have been sent which I archive once they're applied, but with work GMail
> > I don't see how I can easily replicate this since it's also not grouping
> > threads properly.
>
> Yeah, GMail sucks for that. I use 'lei' to get all my patches and 
> replies to them (though its caching will miss replies). Then I delete 
> them from the mbox when they are applied or otherwise finished. lei 
> updates won't re-add them to the mbox.

I'll try to figure something out with GMail.. Perhaps just adding a
label "not yet applied" which I manually remove once it's applied would
be sufficient.

Regards
Luca

>
> Rob
Luca Weiss June 28, 2023, 6:49 a.m. UTC | #5
On Tue Jun 27, 2023 at 5:18 PM CEST, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 26, 2023 at 10:19:09AM +0200, Luca Weiss wrote:
> > On Mon Jun 26, 2023 at 9:41 AM CEST, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > > On 26/06/2023 08:38, Luca Weiss wrote:
> > > >>>> but I guess no resends and it can be superseded.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Right, the patches got reviews but was never applied... I really need to
> > > >>> find a strategy to keep track of sent patches until they're applied with
> > > >>> my work mailbox, it's not the first time that a patch has gotten
> > > >>> forgotten.
> > > >>
> > > >> There was an error reported on the above series. Why would it be 
> > > >> applied?
> > > > 
> > > > The error report at [0] complains about reg-names but I'm quite sure
> > > > that patch 2/3 resolves this error. Does your bot only apply one patch
> > > > at a time and run the check or apply all of them and then run it? It's
> > > > been a while but I'm fairly sure I ran all of the checks before sending
> > > > since I also documented some other patches in the cover letter there.
> > >
> > > You did it in cover letter, not in the patch, so there is no dependency
> > > for bots recorded.
> > 
> > I'm not aware how to put extra comments into a patch in a series with
> > b4, at least last time I checked I don't think it was possible? But I
> > also thought the cover letter was exactly there for giving some
> > background of the series and documenting any dependencies on other
> > patches.
>
> I just put a '---' line and comments after that in the commit messages. 
> That works fine unless your git branch is going upstream directly (i.e. 
> via a pull request). Even when I apply my own patches, I get them from 
> lore and apply so the comments are dropped.

Ah, didn't know this was possible/supported. In the past with git
send-email directly I'd edit the patch file and add some text under the
"---" manually but wasn't aware you can put it directly in the commit
message. But I guess if it produces the same output either way it makes
sense.

I won't have a problem with pull requests since I'm just a normal patch
submitter ;)

Thanks for the advice!

Regards
Luca

>
> Rob
diff mbox series

Patch

diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ufs/qcom,ufs.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ufs/qcom,ufs.yaml
index 0209713d1f88..894b57117314 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ufs/qcom,ufs.yaml
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ufs/qcom,ufs.yaml
@@ -166,6 +166,10 @@  allOf:
         reg:
           minItems: 2
           maxItems: 2
+        reg-names:
+          items:
+            - const: std
+            - const: ice
 
   - if:
       properties: