[RFC,6/9] dt-bindings: vendor-prefixes: add a PCI prefix for Qualcomm Atheros

From: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@linaro.org>

Document the PCI vendor prefix for Qualcomm Atheros so that we can
define the QCA PCI devices on device tree.

Signed-off-by: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@linaro.org>
---
 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.yaml | 1 +
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)

On Thu, Jan 04, 2024 at 02:01:20PM +0100, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> From: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@linaro.org>
> 
> Document the PCI vendor prefix for Qualcomm Atheros so that we can
> define the QCA PCI devices on device tree.

Why? vendor-prefixes.yaml is only applied to property names. 'qca' 
should be the prefix for those.

Rob

On Mon, Jan 8, 2024 at 8:10 PM Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jan 04, 2024 at 02:01:20PM +0100, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> > From: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@linaro.org>
> >
> > Document the PCI vendor prefix for Qualcomm Atheros so that we can
> > define the QCA PCI devices on device tree.
>
> Why? vendor-prefixes.yaml is only applied to property names. 'qca'
> should be the prefix for those.
>
> Rob

I didn't have any better idea. PCI devices on DT are defined by their
"pci<vendor ID>,<model ID>" compatible, not regular human-readable
strings and this makes checkpatch.pl complain.

I'm open to suggestions.

Bartosz

On Mon, Jan 8, 2024 at 12:22 PM Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@bgdev.pl> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jan 8, 2024 at 8:10 PM Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Jan 04, 2024 at 02:01:20PM +0100, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> > > From: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@linaro.org>
> > >
> > > Document the PCI vendor prefix for Qualcomm Atheros so that we can
> > > define the QCA PCI devices on device tree.
> >
> > Why? vendor-prefixes.yaml is only applied to property names. 'qca'
> > should be the prefix for those.
> >
> > Rob
>
> I didn't have any better idea. PCI devices on DT are defined by their
> "pci<vendor ID>,<model ID>" compatible, not regular human-readable
> strings and this makes checkpatch.pl complain.
>
> I'm open to suggestions.

The checkpatch.pl check predates schemas and we could consider just
dropping it. The only thing it provides is checking a patch rather
than the tree (which the schema do). It's pretty hacky because it just
greps the tree for a compatible string which is not entirely accurate.
Also, we can extract an exact list of compatibles with
"dt-extract-compatibles" which would make a better check, but I'm not
sure making dtschema a dependency on checkpatch would be good.

The other option is just ignore the warning. PCI compatibles are fairly rare.

Rob

On 09/01/2024 03:56, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 8, 2024 at 12:22 PM Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@bgdev.pl> wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Jan 8, 2024 at 8:10 PM Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jan 04, 2024 at 02:01:20PM +0100, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
>>>> From: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@linaro.org>
>>>>
>>>> Document the PCI vendor prefix for Qualcomm Atheros so that we can
>>>> define the QCA PCI devices on device tree.
>>>
>>> Why? vendor-prefixes.yaml is only applied to property names. 'qca'
>>> should be the prefix for those.
>>>
>>> Rob
>>
>> I didn't have any better idea. PCI devices on DT are defined by their
>> "pci<vendor ID>,<model ID>" compatible, not regular human-readable
>> strings and this makes checkpatch.pl complain.
>>
>> I'm open to suggestions.
> 
> The checkpatch.pl check predates schemas and we could consider just
> dropping it. The only thing it provides is checking a patch rather
> than the tree (which the schema do). It's pretty hacky because it just
> greps the tree for a compatible string which is not entirely accurate.
> Also, we can extract an exact list of compatibles with
> "dt-extract-compatibles" which would make a better check, but I'm not
> sure making dtschema a dependency on checkpatch would be good.
> 
> The other option is just ignore the warning. PCI compatibles are fairly rare.

Yep, the same warnings are for EEPROM and USB VID/PID compatibles, and
we live with these, so I don't think PCI should be treated differently.

Best regards,
Krzysztof

On Tue, Jan 9, 2024 at 10:17 AM Krzysztof Kozlowski
<krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote:
>
> On 09/01/2024 03:56, Rob Herring wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 8, 2024 at 12:22 PM Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@bgdev.pl> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Mon, Jan 8, 2024 at 8:10 PM Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, Jan 04, 2024 at 02:01:20PM +0100, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> >>>> From: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@linaro.org>
> >>>>
> >>>> Document the PCI vendor prefix for Qualcomm Atheros so that we can
> >>>> define the QCA PCI devices on device tree.
> >>>
> >>> Why? vendor-prefixes.yaml is only applied to property names. 'qca'
> >>> should be the prefix for those.
> >>>
> >>> Rob
> >>
> >> I didn't have any better idea. PCI devices on DT are defined by their
> >> "pci<vendor ID>,<model ID>" compatible, not regular human-readable
> >> strings and this makes checkpatch.pl complain.
> >>
> >> I'm open to suggestions.
> >
> > The checkpatch.pl check predates schemas and we could consider just
> > dropping it. The only thing it provides is checking a patch rather
> > than the tree (which the schema do). It's pretty hacky because it just
> > greps the tree for a compatible string which is not entirely accurate.
> > Also, we can extract an exact list of compatibles with
> > "dt-extract-compatibles" which would make a better check, but I'm not
> > sure making dtschema a dependency on checkpatch would be good.
> >
> > The other option is just ignore the warning. PCI compatibles are fairly rare.
>
> Yep, the same warnings are for EEPROM and USB VID/PID compatibles, and
> we live with these, so I don't think PCI should be treated differently.
>

Got it, I will drop this patch.

Bart