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=-2.2 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no 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 51066CA9ECF for ; Thu, 31 Oct 2019 14:52:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 29969208C0 for ; Thu, 31 Oct 2019 14:52:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728297AbfJaOw2 (ORCPT ); Thu, 31 Oct 2019 10:52:28 -0400 Received: from verein.lst.de ([213.95.11.211]:51479 "EHLO verein.lst.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728021AbfJaOw2 (ORCPT ); Thu, 31 Oct 2019 10:52:28 -0400 Received: by verein.lst.de (Postfix, from userid 2005) id 0102D68BE1; Thu, 31 Oct 2019 15:52:24 +0100 (CET) Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2019 15:52:24 +0100 From: Torsten Duwe To: Maxime Ripard Cc: Chen-Yu Tsai , Rob Herring , Mark Rutland , Thierry Reding , David Airlie , Daniel Vetter , Andrzej Hajda , Laurent Pinchart , Icenowy Zheng , Sean Paul , Vasily Khoruzhick , Harald Geyer , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Thomas Gleixner , dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 6/7] dt-bindings: Add ANX6345 DP/eDP transmitter binding Message-ID: <20191031145224.GA5973@lst.de> References: <20191029153815.C631668C4E@verein.lst.de> <20191029153953.8EE9B68D04@verein.lst.de> <20191031125100.qprbdaaysg3tmhif@hendrix> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20191031125100.qprbdaaysg3tmhif@hendrix> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Oct 31, 2019 at 01:51:00PM +0100, Maxime Ripard wrote: > On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 at 01:16:57PM +0100, Torsten Duwe wrote: > > + > > + ports: > > + anyOf: > > + - port@0: > > + description: Video port for LVTTL input > > + - port@1: > > + description: Video port for eDP output (panel or connector). > > + May be omitted if EDID works reliably. > > + required: > > + - port@0 > > Have you tried to validate those two ports in a DT? Yes, it validates as expected, like I wrote. Various sources told me that json-schema is not always straightforward so I assumed anyOf was OK. > I'm not quite sure what you wanted to express with that anyOf, but if > it was something like port@0 is mandatory, and port@1 is optional, it > should be something like this: > > properties: > > ... > > ports: > type: object > > properties: > port@0: > type: object > description: | > Video port for LVTTL input > > port@1: > type: object > description: | > Video port for eDP output (..) > > required: > - port@0 > > This way, you express that both port@0 and port@1 must by nodes, under > a node called ports, and port@0 is mandatory. That validates, too. Looks better, admittedly. I don't have a strong opinion here. It's just that Rob wrote in : | For this case specifically, we do need to define a common graph | schema, but haven't yet. You can assume we do and only really need to | capture what Maxime said above. (your points back then were port@N descriptions and neccessity for port@0) Are you sure that "object" is specific enough? > You should even push this a bit further by adding > additionalProperties: false to prevent a DT from having undocumented > properties and children for the main node and ports node. You mean like | jsonschema.exceptions.SchemaError: Additional properties are not allowed ('unevaluatedProperties' was unexpected) [...] | On schema: | {'$id': 'http://devicetree.org/schemas/watchdog/allwinner,sun4i-a10-wdt.yaml#', [...] | 'unevaluatedProperties': False} ? ;-) But yes, this patch series passes even with additionalProperties: false. In which form would you like to receive the update? Torsten