Skip to content

Conversation

@artursartamonovsadi
Copy link

Document device tree bindings for ADI SC5XX SoC components including
PADS config, reset controller, system event controller, trigger routing
unit, and RPMSG support.

Ported files from 5.15.x lnxdsp-linux repo

PR Type

  • Bug fix (a change that fixes an issue)
  • New feature (a change that adds new functionality)
  • Breaking change (a change that affects other repos or cause CIs to fail)

PR Checklist

  • I have conducted a self-review of my own code changes
  • I have compiled my changes, including the documentation
  • I have tested the changes on the relevant hardware
  • I have updated the documentation outside this repo accordingly
  • I have provided links for the relevant upstream lore

@pamolloy
Copy link
Collaborator

pamolloy commented Dec 2, 2025

@artursartamonovsadi don't worry about the builds succeeding but please take a look at the "checks":

https://github.com/analogdevicesinc/linux/actions/runs/19863355918/job/56919188243?pr=3033

@artursartamonovsadi
Copy link
Author

device-tree binding checks are passing

- Arturs Artamonovs <arturs.artamonovs@analog.com>
- Utsav Agarwal <Utsav.Agarwal@analog.com>

description: |
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

In practice, no need for pre-formatting

...
adi,system-config = <&pads_system_config>;
...
}; No newline at end of file
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Just to note (it seems this is not the case). The preferred style for indentation in the DT example are 4 spaces


adi,sharc-max:
$ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/uint32
description: "Maximum valid SHARC core ID/count"
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

no constrains? Can we have the full unsigned int range?

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I will limit it to 2 cores

reg:
maxItems: 1

"adi,rcu":
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Why quoting?


"adi,sharc-cores":
$ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/uint32
description: "Number of SHARC cores available"
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Same comment about constrains. I guess we have a limited number of cores 😉

"adi,tru-slave-id":
description: Trigger Routing Slave ID
minItems: 1
maxItems: 1
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think you only need minItems: 1. Then maxItems defaults to 1...

oneOf:
- items:
- enum:
- adi,pads-system-config
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Why? Keep the original please

oneOf:
- items:
- enum:
- adi,system-event-controller
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

ditto

adi,max-slave-id = <187>;
};
&tru {
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Ahh I see. The fixup commits are not very helpful for reviewing

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Should I merge them then and just to have single commit?

Copy link
Collaborator

@pamolloy pamolloy Dec 10, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yup, fixup commits are helpful for development, but should be squashed before review and merge. A PR really shouldn't be approved with fixup commits. And the DCO workflow also doesn't seem to handle it

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The re-review button in the Reviewers section at the top left of the PR is also super helpful after you've made a bunch of updates to notify folks

@pamolloy
Copy link
Collaborator

pamolloy commented Dec 4, 2025

We discussed during the meeting yesterday, but it would be good to convert the txt to yaml.

Can you also update MAINTAINERS appropriately?

@nunojsa
Copy link
Collaborator

nunojsa commented Dec 4, 2025

We discussed during the meeting yesterday, but it would be good to convert the txt to yaml.

Agreed! It's work that will be needed anyways so better to do it now.

@artursartamonovsadi
Copy link
Author

We discussed during the meeting yesterday, but it would be good to convert the txt to yaml.

Can you also update MAINTAINERS appropriately?

Hi, I prefer the scope of PR to stay within devicetree bindings, there is no maintainers defined in this adsp-main-6.12 branches, so far. But MAINTAINERS defined in upstreaming patch series. Maybe better to open separate PR, with complete MAINTAINERS list, rather in single PR we can try to fix all the issues.

@artursartamonovsadi artursartamonovsadi force-pushed the adsp-main-6.12-devicetree-soc branch from e70e148 to 17ae7c8 Compare December 5, 2025 12:54
@artursartamonovsadi
Copy link
Author

@nunojsa I have left one "|" in adi,rpmsg-SC598.yaml description as if I remove it I get this error from dt binding check:
Error: entation/devicetree/bindings/soc/adi/adi,rpmsg-SC598.yaml:21:60: [error] syntax error: mapping values are not allowed here (syntax)

@pamolloy pamolloy requested a review from nunojsa December 10, 2025 09:12
  Document device tree bindings for ADI SC5XX SoC components including
  PADS config, reset controller, system event controller, trigger routing
  unit, and RPMSG support.

Signed-off-by: Arturs Artamonovs <Arturs.Artamonovs@analog.com>
@artursartamonovsadi artursartamonovsadi force-pushed the adsp-main-6.12-devicetree-soc branch from 91c267a to ffd6b12 Compare December 10, 2025 14:14
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

7 participants