Re: [PATCH v6 3/3] arm64: dts: renesas: r9a07g044: Add USB2.0 device support

[Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>]

Hi Sergey,

On Tue, Aug 17, 2021 at 6:41 PM Sergey Shtylyov <s.shtylyov@omp.ru> wrote:
> On 8/17/21 2:12 PM, Biju Das wrote:
> [...]
> >>>> Add USB2.0 device support to RZ/G2L SoC DT.
> >>>>
> >>>> Signed-off-by: Biju Das <biju.das.jz@bp.renesas.com>
> >>>> Reviewed-by: Lad Prabhakar <prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj@bp.renesas.com>
> >>>> Reviewed-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@glider.be>
> >>> [...]
> >>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/renesas/r9a07g044.dtsi
> >>> b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/renesas/r9a07g044.dtsi
> >>>> index de78c921af22..2f313c2a81c7 100644
> >>>> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/renesas/r9a07g044.dtsi
> >>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/renesas/r9a07g044.dtsi
> >>>> @@ -391,6 +391,25 @@
> >>>>                    power-domains = <&cpg>;
> >>>>                    status = "disabled";
> >>>>            };
> >>>> +
> >>>> +          hsusb: usb@11c60000 {
> >>>> +                  compatible = "renesas,usbhs-r9a07g044",
> >>>> +                               "renesas,rza2-usbhs";
> >>>> +                  reg = <0 0x11c60000 0 0x10000>;
> >>>> +                  interrupts = <GIC_SPI 100 IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING>,
> >>>> +                               <GIC_SPI 101 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
> >>>> +                               <GIC_SPI 102 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
> >>>> +                               <GIC_SPI 103 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;
> >>>
> >>>    Don't we need to specify "interrupt-names" when there a more than 1
> >>> interrupts?
> >>
> >> This dtsi changes, as per binding documentation [1]. As you see,
> >> "interrupt-names" is optional.
> >
> > For now I will go with current dt changes.
> >
> > Later  I will create incremental patches for dt-binding with optional "interrupt-names",
> > "clock-names" and "reset names" for all the SoC's supported by this binding doc.
> >
> > After that, will send an incremental patch with adding optional properties in all SoC dtsi.
> >
> > Does it make sense?
>
>    I had the impression that the "*-names" prop was mandatory for a "*" prop having 2 values or mores.
> If it's now allowed to be optional, don't bother with that at all.

There's a difference between "mandatory according to good DT
binding design" and "mandatory according to the actual json-schema
DT bindings".  For now the tools only enforce the latter...

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

                        Geert

-- 
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
                                -- Linus Torvalds