On 1/16/2024 5:33 PM, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
On 16/01/2024 06:45, Mao Jinlong wrote:
Remove pattern match of ETE node name. Use ete with the number as the name for ete nodes.
Signed-off-by: Mao Jinlong quic_jinlmao@quicinc.com
.../bindings/arm/arm,embedded-trace-extension.yaml | 6 ++---- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arm,embedded-trace-extension.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arm,embedded-trace-extension.yaml index f725e6940993..ed78cc7ae94a 100644
a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arm,embedded-trace-extension.yaml +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arm,embedded-trace-extension.yaml @@ -22,8 +22,6 @@ description: | with any optional connection graph as per the coresight bindings. properties: - $nodename: - pattern: "^ete([0-9a-f]+)$" compatible: items: - const: arm,embedded-trace-extension @@ -55,13 +53,13 @@ examples: # An ETE node without legacy CoreSight connections - | - ete0 { + ete-0 {
Why do we need the number ? why not simply "ete" as Krzysztof suggested ?
Hi Suzuki & Krzysztof ,
If name all the ete nodes' name as 'ete', there will be error below when build images.
arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm8450.dtsi:301.6-312.4: ERROR (duplicate_node_names): /ete: Duplicate node name arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm8450.dtsi:314.6-325.4: ERROR (duplicate_node_names): /ete: Duplicate node name arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm8450.dtsi:327.6-338.4: ERROR (duplicate_node_names): /ete: Duplicate node name arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm8450.dtsi:340.6-351.4: ERROR (duplicate_node_names): /ete: Duplicate node name arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm8450.dtsi:353.6-364.4: ERROR (duplicate_node_names): /ete: Duplicate node name arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm8450.dtsi:366.6-377.4: ERROR (duplicate_node_names): /ete: Duplicate node name arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm8450.dtsi:379.6-390.4: ERROR (duplicate_node_names): /ete: Duplicate node name
Thanks Jinlong Mao