Re: [PATCH v2 1/7] dt-bindings: Add support for export-symbols node
Herve Codina <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | org.kernel.vger.devicetree-compiler,org.kernel.vger.linux-devicetree,org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel |
|---|---|
| Organization | Bootlin |
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Hi Krzysztof, David, Rob, Any opinion? Best regards, Hervé On Wed, 18 Jun 2025 15:24:07 +0530 Ayush Singh <[email protected]> wrote: > On 6/18/25 15:02, Herve Codina wrote: ... > > > >>>>> +patternProperties: > >>>>> + "^[a-zA-Z_]?[a-zA-Z0-9_]*$": > >>>> This messes up with coding style which I would prefer keep intact. > >>>> Basically these properties will be using label style. > >>> Yes, those properties remap phandles. > >>> > >>> Their names are the name of the label used from the overlay and their > >>> values are the phandle mapped. > >>> > >>> You already have this kind properties using label style in __symbols__, > >>> __fixups__, __local_fixups__ nodes. > >> I have them in DTB, but I don't have these in DTS. The exported-symbols > >> would be in the DTS and that is what coding style is about. > >> > > I think export-symbols has to be in DTS. > > Maybe it could be described in an other way in order to avoid the coding style > > issue you reported. > > > > Hardware: > > i2c0 from SoC --------- connector 1, I2C A signals > > i2c1 from SoC --------- connector 1, I2C B signals > > > > connector1 { > > export-symbols { > > i2c_a = <&i2c0>; > > i2c_b = <&i2c1>; > > }; > > }; > > > > In order to avoid the coding style issue, this could be replace > > with: > > connector1 { > > export-symbols { > > symbol-names = "i2c_a", "i2c_b"; > > symbols = <&i2c0>, <&i2c1>; > > }; > > }; > > > > Krzysztof, Rob, do you think this could be accepted ? > > > > Ayush, David, do you thing this could be easily implemented in fdtoverlay ? > > > > Best regards, > > Hervé > > > > Well, it is possible. > > However, on connectors like pb2 header, there will be 50-100 export > symbols. So it will start becoming difficult to maintain. > > Additionally, the further away we move from __symbols__ style, the more > difficult the implementation will become since we can currently very > easily piggy-back on __symbols__ resolution implementation. > > > Best Regards, > > Ayush Singh >