The amlogic,g12a-mipi-dphy-analog is a feature of the simple-mfd
amlogic,meson-axg-hhi-sysctrl system control register zone which is an
intermixed registers zone, thus it's very hard to define clear ranges for
each SoC controlled features even if possible.

The amlogic,g12a-mipi-dphy-analog was wrongly documented as an independent
register range, which is not the reality, thus fix the bindings by dropping
the reg property now it's referred from amlogic,meson-gx-hhi-sysctrl.yaml
and documented as a subnode of amlogic,meson-axg-hhi-sysctrl.

Also drop the unnecessary example, the top level bindings example should
be enough.

Fixes: 76ab79f9726c ("dt-bindings: phy: add Amlogic G12A Analog MIPI D-PHY bindings")
Signed-off-by: Neil Armstrong <neil.armstrong@linaro.org>
---
 .../bindings/phy/amlogic,g12a-mipi-dphy-analog.yaml          | 12 ------------
 1 file changed, 12 deletions(-)

diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/amlogic,g12a-mipi-dphy-analog.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/amlogic,g12a-mipi-dphy-analog.yaml
index c8c83acfb871..81c2654b7e57 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/amlogic,g12a-mipi-dphy-analog.yaml
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/amlogic,g12a-mipi-dphy-analog.yaml
@@ -16,20 +16,8 @@ properties:
   "#phy-cells":
     const: 0
 
-  reg:
-    maxItems: 1
-
 required:
   - compatible
-  - reg
   - "#phy-cells"
 
 additionalProperties: false
-
-examples:
-  - |
-    phy@0 {
-          compatible = "amlogic,g12a-mipi-dphy-analog";
-          reg = <0x0 0xc>;
-          #phy-cells = <0>;
-    };

-- 
2.34.1

On Fri, 24 Nov 2023 09:41:15 +0100, Neil Armstrong wrote:
> The amlogic,g12a-mipi-dphy-analog is a feature of the simple-mfd
> amlogic,meson-axg-hhi-sysctrl system control register zone which is an
> intermixed registers zone, thus it's very hard to define clear ranges for
> each SoC controlled features even if possible.
> 
> The amlogic,g12a-mipi-dphy-analog was wrongly documented as an independent
> register range, which is not the reality, thus fix the bindings by dropping
> the reg property now it's referred from amlogic,meson-gx-hhi-sysctrl.yaml
> and documented as a subnode of amlogic,meson-axg-hhi-sysctrl.
> 
> Also drop the unnecessary example, the top level bindings example should
> be enough.
> 
> Fixes: 76ab79f9726c ("dt-bindings: phy: add Amlogic G12A Analog MIPI D-PHY bindings")
> Signed-off-by: Neil Armstrong <neil.armstrong@linaro.org>
> ---
>  .../bindings/phy/amlogic,g12a-mipi-dphy-analog.yaml          | 12 ------------
>  1 file changed, 12 deletions(-)
> 

Reviewed-by: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>

On Fri, Nov 24, 2023 at 09:41:15AM +0100, Neil Armstrong wrote:
> The amlogic,g12a-mipi-dphy-analog is a feature of the simple-mfd
> amlogic,meson-axg-hhi-sysctrl system control register zone which is an
> intermixed registers zone, thus it's very hard to define clear ranges for
> each SoC controlled features even if possible.
> 
> The amlogic,g12a-mipi-dphy-analog was wrongly documented as an independent
> register range, which is not the reality, thus fix the bindings by dropping
> the reg property now it's referred from amlogic,meson-gx-hhi-sysctrl.yaml
> and documented as a subnode of amlogic,meson-axg-hhi-sysctrl.
> 
> Also drop the unnecessary example, the top level bindings example should
> be enough.
> 
> Fixes: 76ab79f9726c ("dt-bindings: phy: add Amlogic G12A Analog MIPI D-PHY bindings")
> Signed-off-by: Neil Armstrong <neil.armstrong@linaro.org>

I feel like I left a tag on this one before, but I can't remember.
Perhaps I missed the conclusion to the discussion to the discussion with
Rob about whether having "reg" was desirable that lead to a tag being
dropped?

> ---
>  .../bindings/phy/amlogic,g12a-mipi-dphy-analog.yaml          | 12 ------------
>  1 file changed, 12 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/amlogic,g12a-mipi-dphy-analog.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/amlogic,g12a-mipi-dphy-analog.yaml
> index c8c83acfb871..81c2654b7e57 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/amlogic,g12a-mipi-dphy-analog.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/amlogic,g12a-mipi-dphy-analog.yaml
> @@ -16,20 +16,8 @@ properties:
>    "#phy-cells":
>      const: 0
>  
> -  reg:
> -    maxItems: 1
> -
>  required:
>    - compatible
> -  - reg
>    - "#phy-cells"
>  
>  additionalProperties: false
> -
> -examples:
> -  - |
> -    phy@0 {
> -          compatible = "amlogic,g12a-mipi-dphy-analog";
> -          reg = <0x0 0xc>;
> -          #phy-cells = <0>;
> -    };
> 
> -- 
> 2.34.1
> 

Hi Conor,

On 24/11/2023 13:36, Conor Dooley wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 24, 2023 at 09:41:15AM +0100, Neil Armstrong wrote:
>> The amlogic,g12a-mipi-dphy-analog is a feature of the simple-mfd
>> amlogic,meson-axg-hhi-sysctrl system control register zone which is an
>> intermixed registers zone, thus it's very hard to define clear ranges for
>> each SoC controlled features even if possible.
>>
>> The amlogic,g12a-mipi-dphy-analog was wrongly documented as an independent
>> register range, which is not the reality, thus fix the bindings by dropping
>> the reg property now it's referred from amlogic,meson-gx-hhi-sysctrl.yaml
>> and documented as a subnode of amlogic,meson-axg-hhi-sysctrl.
>>
>> Also drop the unnecessary example, the top level bindings example should
>> be enough.
>>
>> Fixes: 76ab79f9726c ("dt-bindings: phy: add Amlogic G12A Analog MIPI D-PHY bindings")
>> Signed-off-by: Neil Armstrong <neil.armstrong@linaro.org>
> 
> I feel like I left a tag on this one before, but I can't remember.
> Perhaps I missed the conclusion to the discussion to the discussion with
> Rob about whether having "reg" was desirable that lead to a tag being
> dropped?

I checked again and nope, not tag, but Rob's question was legitimate and I reworded
and clarified the commit message following your reviews.
On the other side you suggested a Fixes tag, which I added.

The rewording is about why reg doesn't make sense on the nature of the memory
region and it doesn't make sense here like other similar nodes.

Neil

> 
>> ---
>>   .../bindings/phy/amlogic,g12a-mipi-dphy-analog.yaml          | 12 ------------
>>   1 file changed, 12 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/amlogic,g12a-mipi-dphy-analog.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/amlogic,g12a-mipi-dphy-analog.yaml
>> index c8c83acfb871..81c2654b7e57 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/amlogic,g12a-mipi-dphy-analog.yaml
>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/amlogic,g12a-mipi-dphy-analog.yaml
>> @@ -16,20 +16,8 @@ properties:
>>     "#phy-cells":
>>       const: 0
>>   
>> -  reg:
>> -    maxItems: 1
>> -
>>   required:
>>     - compatible
>> -  - reg
>>     - "#phy-cells"
>>   
>>   additionalProperties: false
>> -
>> -examples:
>> -  - |
>> -    phy@0 {
>> -          compatible = "amlogic,g12a-mipi-dphy-analog";
>> -          reg = <0x0 0xc>;
>> -          #phy-cells = <0>;
>> -    };
>>
>> -- 
>> 2.34.1
>>

On Fri, Nov 24, 2023 at 02:50:58PM +0100, Neil Armstrong wrote:
> Hi Conor,
> 
> On 24/11/2023 13:36, Conor Dooley wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 24, 2023 at 09:41:15AM +0100, Neil Armstrong wrote:
> > > The amlogic,g12a-mipi-dphy-analog is a feature of the simple-mfd
> > > amlogic,meson-axg-hhi-sysctrl system control register zone which is an
> > > intermixed registers zone, thus it's very hard to define clear ranges for
> > > each SoC controlled features even if possible.
> > > 
> > > The amlogic,g12a-mipi-dphy-analog was wrongly documented as an independent
> > > register range, which is not the reality, thus fix the bindings by dropping
> > > the reg property now it's referred from amlogic,meson-gx-hhi-sysctrl.yaml
> > > and documented as a subnode of amlogic,meson-axg-hhi-sysctrl.
> > > 
> > > Also drop the unnecessary example, the top level bindings example should
> > > be enough.
> > > 
> > > Fixes: 76ab79f9726c ("dt-bindings: phy: add Amlogic G12A Analog MIPI D-PHY bindings")
> > > Signed-off-by: Neil Armstrong <neil.armstrong@linaro.org>
> > 
> > I feel like I left a tag on this one before, but I can't remember.
> > Perhaps I missed the conclusion to the discussion to the discussion with
> > Rob about whether having "reg" was desirable that lead to a tag being
> > dropped?
> 
> I checked again and nope, not tag, but Rob's question was legitimate and I reworded
> and clarified the commit message following your reviews.
> On the other side you suggested a Fixes tag, which I added.
> 
> The rewording is about why reg doesn't make sense on the nature of the memory
> region and it doesn't make sense here like other similar nodes.

Okay, I thought that I had given you one. Perhaps I forgot to send, or
Rob's message came in between me asking about the Fixes tag & replying
with an Ack. Sorry about that,
Acked-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>

Cheers,
Conor.

On 24/11/2023 15:41, Conor Dooley wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 24, 2023 at 02:50:58PM +0100, Neil Armstrong wrote:
>> Hi Conor,
>>
>> On 24/11/2023 13:36, Conor Dooley wrote:
>>> On Fri, Nov 24, 2023 at 09:41:15AM +0100, Neil Armstrong wrote:
>>>> The amlogic,g12a-mipi-dphy-analog is a feature of the simple-mfd
>>>> amlogic,meson-axg-hhi-sysctrl system control register zone which is an
>>>> intermixed registers zone, thus it's very hard to define clear ranges for
>>>> each SoC controlled features even if possible.
>>>>
>>>> The amlogic,g12a-mipi-dphy-analog was wrongly documented as an independent
>>>> register range, which is not the reality, thus fix the bindings by dropping
>>>> the reg property now it's referred from amlogic,meson-gx-hhi-sysctrl.yaml
>>>> and documented as a subnode of amlogic,meson-axg-hhi-sysctrl.
>>>>
>>>> Also drop the unnecessary example, the top level bindings example should
>>>> be enough.
>>>>
>>>> Fixes: 76ab79f9726c ("dt-bindings: phy: add Amlogic G12A Analog MIPI D-PHY bindings")
>>>> Signed-off-by: Neil Armstrong <neil.armstrong@linaro.org>
>>>
>>> I feel like I left a tag on this one before, but I can't remember.
>>> Perhaps I missed the conclusion to the discussion to the discussion with
>>> Rob about whether having "reg" was desirable that lead to a tag being
>>> dropped?
>>
>> I checked again and nope, not tag, but Rob's question was legitimate and I reworded
>> and clarified the commit message following your reviews.
>> On the other side you suggested a Fixes tag, which I added.
>>
>> The rewording is about why reg doesn't make sense on the nature of the memory
>> region and it doesn't make sense here like other similar nodes.
> 
> Okay, I thought that I had given you one. Perhaps I forgot to send, or
> Rob's message came in between me asking about the Fixes tag & replying
> with an Ack. Sorry about that,
> Acked-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>

No problem thanks for your review.

Neil

> 
> Cheers,
> Conor.