From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-15.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER, INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 80899C432BE for ; Fri, 20 Aug 2021 06:26:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 661F760FE7 for ; Fri, 20 Aug 2021 06:26:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S238396AbhHTG1S (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Aug 2021 02:27:18 -0400 Received: from egress-ip33a.ess.de.barracuda.com ([18.185.115.192]:46436 "EHLO egress-ip33a.ess.de.barracuda.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S238392AbhHTG1S (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Aug 2021 02:27:18 -0400 Received: from mail-wr1-f72.google.com (mail-wr1-f72.google.com [209.85.221.72]) by mx-outbound9-222.eu-central-1a.ess.aws.cudaops.com (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 20 Aug 2021 06:26:33 +0000 Received: by mail-wr1-f72.google.com with SMTP id v18-20020adfe2920000b029013bbfb19640so2473113wri.17 for ; Thu, 19 Aug 2021 23:26:34 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mistralsolutions.com; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=hcuPJzI48ACDUsy7FQfltiq6GrliZ7PQzihG218WNKY=; b=ehFoCCvzT0rbZ7ht4RKXR47svEKDf/oQh5OE/A1Bgp19SIELkIxdcqp+igW66HWyLr qjxlLZTrmk74xo2GaD5NmJtfvlj7NZH7DvyN+U5uw7g1GZCEiDU8i4nuim/bo5xu3bTP yR2jO8K88rRnOc7XOAgAyt2Pg96/AJFPtYVig= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=hcuPJzI48ACDUsy7FQfltiq6GrliZ7PQzihG218WNKY=; b=lI+xMAON+Lka19kJhd/HkVWF4yQPGgKGJgTdhRVtIKACF94AICXE11fJQ67TMcdSSM ouAgIb7udz2QW1P0rpj+Mzkh+4O/zjtY1PH/wpCHc2jcYtemcjY4FpRbBCyXr6e0bfJh Z0lrtJgX87Mo66IhkzG1sUaRE8gdsS3w5TptZMuWveHKvn0Mwz5CJIN7jbK8C+6ymUWE /54ppUHgY2F9rVZyeoN59stap6zOzAIa9L0+/WWWzT6tzUdx8iGnWC9YwmeUigEBSQy1 rY4pWFRalNbhkh7nm+T51hhlZOl2CeAnVTzcOvFXxfAjruB2TPwg2RRhGJrDfmSS+cxv W3/A== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531xBNHE+djVV343jPJXMnGhfFB6C5lOKYabuvPSoxDkKDC/eNMV 903kljn35ZnXdMU+s8VraxP7XSB/ZDYpkf9pT5ou9hPncRG2+ZxBQ1hFzGZzGK0ljhoclNzcrA1 mPOYZbGoknJoATeku6gfgbTI/RSWtJf4CpSPOXDvbnWYlOo/SMdD0GeVxhFZtRuAaUho6M+kt5c NB07rLwQ== X-Received: by 2002:a7b:cb02:: with SMTP id u2mr2081808wmj.103.1629440793593; Thu, 19 Aug 2021 23:26:33 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwUpTVpY5loxCylXUXl3QzaPyMvv2z8srnQpPVyv3dpCPkhvSqbLiBl6xuULNB+8ghw1qIJ+8C6IiVC6SPpXn0= X-Received: by 2002:a7b:cb02:: with SMTP id u2mr2081780wmj.103.1629440793277; Thu, 19 Aug 2021 23:26:33 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20210818074030.1877-1-sinthu.raja@ti.com> <20210818130535.siv7jpjjzfwonwdt@unsteady> In-Reply-To: <20210818130535.siv7jpjjzfwonwdt@unsteady> From: Sinthu Raja M Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2021 11:56:21 +0530 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH V1] dt-bindings: remoteproc: k3-dsp: Update example to remove board specific To: Nishanth Menon Cc: "Nagalla, Hari" , Ohad Ben-Cohen , Rob Herring , Suman Anna , Mathieu Poirier , linux-remoteproc@vger.kernel.org, Device Tree Mailing List , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Lokesh Vutla , Sinthu Raja Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-BESS-ID: 1629440793-302526-18217-13315-1 X-BESS-VER: 2019.1_20210819.2207 X-BESS-Apparent-Source-IP: 209.85.221.72 X-BESS-Outbound-Spam-Score: 0.40 X-BESS-Outbound-Spam-Report: Code version 3.2, rules version 3.2.2.234048 [from cloudscan12-73.eu-central-1a.ess.aws.cudaops.com] Rule breakdown below pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------- 0.40 BSF_SC0_SA085b META: Custom Rule SA085b 0.00 BSF_SC0_MISMATCH_TO META: Envelope rcpt doesn't match header 0.00 BSF_BESS_OUTBOUND META: BESS Outbound X-BESS-Outbound-Spam-Status: SCORE=0.40 using account:ESS91090 scores of KILL_LEVEL=7.0 tests=BSF_SC0_SA085b, BSF_SC0_MISMATCH_TO, BSF_BESS_OUTBOUND X-BESS-BRTS-Status: 1 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-remoteproc@vger.kernel.org With Regards Sinthu Raja On Wed, Aug 18, 2021 at 6:35 PM Nishanth Menon wrote: > > On 13:10-20210818, Sinthu Raja wrote: > > The example includes a board-specific compatible property, but developers > > need to add the board name each time when a new board is added to the K3 > > J721E SoC list. This grows the compatible string-list. So, drop the > > board-specific compatible string and add cbass_main as a parent node to > > What is cbass_main node? > > > avoid parent node and child node address-cells mismatch error. > > > > I think you mean that since the existing example uses address cells and > size for 64bit addresses and sizes, you are introducing a bus segment > indicative of the same capability to reduce the churn in the binding. > Correct? if so, rephrase accordingly. > > > Signed-off-by: Sinthu Raja > > Your From: and Signed-off-by email IDs do not match. You might want to > re-read the contribution guidelines documentation in linux kernel. > > This should be also tagged with Fixes: since it is fixing a pre-existing > binding that slipped through our review. Hi Nishanth, May I know to which commit I have to tag the Fixes. If you are referring to the below review, then the patch is not merged and how shall we add the Fixes tag for this patch. https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-arm-kernel/patch/20210607093314.23909-2-sinthu.raja@ti.com/ > > NOTE: at least my test.. (I think rob's system will still complain) > base: next-20210818 > b4 am -o ~/tmp -3 -g -t -l -c -s --no-cover 20210818074030.1877-1-sinthu.raja@ti.com > https://pastebin.ubuntu.com/p/VxzzvzpY9N/ > > I mean, both these can be caught with checkpatch and standard checks, so > did you see that in your basic vett prior to posting? It didn't catch in my basic patch verification. But the generated patch does have the From header, but sometimes the From header is getting truncated when submitting for review. Still working on that to fix it. (using Gmail client to submitting the patch) With Regards Sinthu Raja > > > --- > > Changes in V1: > > Fixed alignment issue which caused the yaml parse error. > > Some 101 comments: > > A) when you post a new revision, post a url like previous versions in > diffstat - : > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-devicetree/20210817152005.21575-1-sinthu.raja@ti.com/ > B) When you are sending the very first patch, it is already V1 and > does'nt need to be explicitly stated. this update to your original > post is a V2, so, when you update this patch to address the review > comments, the next revision will be V3. > > > > > .../devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-dsp-rproc.yaml | 6 ++---- > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-dsp-rproc.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-dsp-rproc.yaml > > index 6070456a7b67..e44a9397b8db 100644 > > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-dsp-rproc.yaml > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-dsp-rproc.yaml > > @@ -132,10 +132,8 @@ required: > > unevaluatedProperties: false > > > > examples: > > - - | > > - / { > > - model = "Texas Instruments K3 J721E SoC"; > > - compatible = "ti,j721e"; > > + - |+ > > minor detail: you are also doing one additional change -> you are now using > the standard example template and adding the example node instead of a > complete example node as well here. Personally, I do prefer this > approach rather than the previous example. > > > + cbass_main { > > #address-cells = <2>; > > #size-cells = <2>; > > > > Usually, when one sees problems like these, they tend to be > symptomatic, and we need to look if there is a similar pattern of > error else where in the codebase. > > Sigh, in this case, I see the same problem in: > a) Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-r5f-rproc.yaml > b) Documentation/devicetree/bindings/hwlock/ti,omap-hwspinlock.yaml > > Hari, Sinthu, > Can we fix these in a series that belongs to each maintainer? > > > > > -- > > 2.31.1 > > > > -- > Regards, > Nishanth Menon > Key (0xDDB5849D1736249D) / Fingerprint: F8A2 8693 54EB 8232 17A3 1A34 DDB5 849D 1736 249D