[v2,1/2] dt-bindings: mmc: mtk-sd: Add eMMC for AN7581

Document eMMC compatible for AN7581. This eMMC controller doesn't have
regulator exposed to the system and have a single clock only for source
clock and only default pintctrl.

Rework the schema to permit these new requirements and make supply
optional only for airoha,an7581-mmc compatible.

Also provide an example for airoha,an7581-mmc.

Signed-off-by: Christian Marangi <ansuelsmth@gmail.com>
---
Changes v2:
- Drop else condition
- Move Required and pinctrl property to dedicated if condition

 .../devicetree/bindings/mmc/mtk-sd.yaml       | 116 +++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 110 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

On Mon, 20 Jan 2025 19:47:01 +0100, Christian Marangi wrote:
> Document eMMC compatible for AN7581. This eMMC controller doesn't have
> regulator exposed to the system and have a single clock only for source
> clock and only default pintctrl.
> 
> Rework the schema to permit these new requirements and make supply
> optional only for airoha,an7581-mmc compatible.
> 
> Also provide an example for airoha,an7581-mmc.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Christian Marangi <ansuelsmth@gmail.com>
> ---
> Changes v2:
> - Drop else condition
> - Move Required and pinctrl property to dedicated if condition
> 
>  .../devicetree/bindings/mmc/mtk-sd.yaml       | 116 +++++++++++++++++-
>  1 file changed, 110 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> 

My bot found errors running 'make dt_binding_check' on your patch:

yamllint warnings/errors:

dtschema/dtc warnings/errors:
Error: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mmc/mtk-sd.example.dts:104.31-32 syntax error
FATAL ERROR: Unable to parse input tree
make[2]: *** [scripts/Makefile.dtbs:131: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mmc/mtk-sd.example.dtb] Error 1
make[2]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs....
make[1]: *** [/builds/robherring/dt-review-ci/linux/Makefile:1506: dt_binding_check] Error 2
make: *** [Makefile:251: __sub-make] Error 2

doc reference errors (make refcheckdocs):

See https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/devicetree-bindings/patch/20250120184728.18325-1-ansuelsmth@gmail.com

The base for the series is generally the latest rc1. A different dependency
should be noted in *this* patch.

If you already ran 'make dt_binding_check' and didn't see the above
error(s), then make sure 'yamllint' is installed and dt-schema is up to
date:

pip3 install dtschema --upgrade

Please check and re-submit after running the above command yourself. Note
that DT_SCHEMA_FILES can be set to your schema file to speed up checking
your schema. However, it must be unset to test all examples with your schema.

On Mon, Jan 20, 2025 at 07:47:02PM +0100, Christian Marangi wrote:
> -			pinctrl_select_state(host->pinctrl, host->pins_uhs);
> +			/* Skip setting uhs pins if not supported */
> +			if (host->pins_uhs)
> +				pinctrl_select_state(host->pinctrl, host->pins_uhs);
>  		} else {
>  			dev_pm_clear_wake_irq(host->dev);
>  		}
> @@ -2816,9 +2835,12 @@ static int msdc_of_clock_parse(struct platform_device *pdev,
>  	if (IS_ERR(host->src_clk))
>  		return PTR_ERR(host->src_clk);
>  
> -	host->h_clk = devm_clk_get(&pdev->dev, "hclk");
> -	if (IS_ERR(host->h_clk))
> -		return PTR_ERR(host->h_clk);
> +	/* AN7581 SoC doesn't have hclk */
> +	if (!device_is_compatible(&pdev->dev, "airoha,an7581-mmc")) {

Please avoid coding compatible in multiple places. Not only because
above check is slow comparing to check on integer, but it just scales
poorly and leads to less readable further code. Use driver data with
model name or flags/quirks bitmask.

Best regards,
Krzysztof

On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 08:59:19AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 20, 2025 at 07:47:02PM +0100, Christian Marangi wrote:
> > -			pinctrl_select_state(host->pinctrl, host->pins_uhs);
> > +			/* Skip setting uhs pins if not supported */
> > +			if (host->pins_uhs)
> > +				pinctrl_select_state(host->pinctrl, host->pins_uhs);
> >  		} else {
> >  			dev_pm_clear_wake_irq(host->dev);
> >  		}
> > @@ -2816,9 +2835,12 @@ static int msdc_of_clock_parse(struct platform_device *pdev,
> >  	if (IS_ERR(host->src_clk))
> >  		return PTR_ERR(host->src_clk);
> >  
> > -	host->h_clk = devm_clk_get(&pdev->dev, "hclk");
> > -	if (IS_ERR(host->h_clk))
> > -		return PTR_ERR(host->h_clk);
> > +	/* AN7581 SoC doesn't have hclk */
> > +	if (!device_is_compatible(&pdev->dev, "airoha,an7581-mmc")) {
> 
> Please avoid coding compatible in multiple places. Not only because
> above check is slow comparing to check on integer, but it just scales
> poorly and leads to less readable further code. Use driver data with
> model name or flags/quirks bitmask.
>

I implemented this in a more compatible way so we don't need an
additional compatible anymore. Soo this series is not needed anymore.

Should I flag these as not applicable anywhere in the patchwork systems?

On Mon, 27 Jan 2025 at 12:41, Christian Marangi <ansuelsmth@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 08:59:19AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 20, 2025 at 07:47:02PM +0100, Christian Marangi wrote:
> > > -                   pinctrl_select_state(host->pinctrl, host->pins_uhs);
> > > +                   /* Skip setting uhs pins if not supported */
> > > +                   if (host->pins_uhs)
> > > +                           pinctrl_select_state(host->pinctrl, host->pins_uhs);
> > >             } else {
> > >                     dev_pm_clear_wake_irq(host->dev);
> > >             }
> > > @@ -2816,9 +2835,12 @@ static int msdc_of_clock_parse(struct platform_device *pdev,
> > >     if (IS_ERR(host->src_clk))
> > >             return PTR_ERR(host->src_clk);
> > >
> > > -   host->h_clk = devm_clk_get(&pdev->dev, "hclk");
> > > -   if (IS_ERR(host->h_clk))
> > > -           return PTR_ERR(host->h_clk);
> > > +   /* AN7581 SoC doesn't have hclk */
> > > +   if (!device_is_compatible(&pdev->dev, "airoha,an7581-mmc")) {
> >
> > Please avoid coding compatible in multiple places. Not only because
> > above check is slow comparing to check on integer, but it just scales
> > poorly and leads to less readable further code. Use driver data with
> > model name or flags/quirks bitmask.
> >
>
> I implemented this in a more compatible way so we don't need an
> additional compatible anymore. Soo this series is not needed anymore.
>
> Should I flag these as not applicable anywhere in the patchwork systems?

No need to, just send new versions.

Kind regards
Uffe