Hi Rob,
On Tue, Jun 15, 2021 at 9:16 PM Rob Herring robh@kernel.org wrote:
If a property has an 'items' list, then a 'minItems' or 'maxItems' with the same size as the list is redundant and can be dropped. Note that is DT schema specific behavior and not standard json-schema behavior. The tooling will fixup the final schema adding any unspecified minItems/maxItems.
This condition is partially checked with the meta-schema already, but only if both 'minItems' and 'maxItems' are equal to the 'items' length. An improved meta-schema is pending.
Signed-off-by: Rob Herring robh@kernel.org
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/stm32-dwmac.yaml +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/stm32-dwmac.yaml @@ -46,7 +46,6 @@ properties:
clocks: minItems: 3
- maxItems: 5 items:
- description: GMAC main clock
- description: MAC TX clock
While resolving the conflict with commit fea99822914039c6 ("dt-bindings: net: document ptp_ref clk in dwmac") in soc/for-next, I noticed the following construct for clock-names:
clock-names: minItems: 3 maxItems: 6 contains: enum: - stmmaceth - mac-clk-tx - mac-clk-rx - ethstp - eth-ck - ptp_ref
Should this use items instead of enum, and drop maxItems, or is this a valid construct to support specifying the clocks in random order? If the latter, it does mean that the order of clock-names may not match the order of the clock descriptions.
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