Add device-tree bindings for the RT2800 SOC wifi device found in older
Ralink/Mediatek devices.
Signed-off-by: Rosen Penev <rosenp@gmail.com>
---
.../bindings/net/wireless/ralink,rt2800.yaml | 47 +++++++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 47 insertions(+)
create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/wireless/ralink,rt2800.yaml
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/wireless/ralink,rt2800.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/wireless/ralink,rt2800.yaml
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..8c13b25bd8b4
--- /dev/null
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/wireless/ralink,rt2800.yaml
@@ -0,0 +1,47 @@
+# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause)
+%YAML 1.2
+---
+$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/net/wireless/ralink,rt2800.yaml#
+$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml#
+
+title: Ralink RT2800 wireless devices
+
+maintainers:
+ - Stanislaw Gruszka <stf_xl@wp.pl>
+
+description: |
+ This node provides properties for configuring RT2800 SOC wifi device.
+ The node is expected to be specified as a root node of the device.
+
+allOf:
+ - $ref: ieee80211.yaml#
+
+properties:
+ compatible:
+ enum:
+ - ralink,rt2880-wifi
+
+ reg:
+ maxItems: 1
+
+ clocks:
+ maxItems: 1
+
+ interrupts:
+ maxItems: 1
+
+required:
+ - compatible
+ - reg
+
+additionalProperties: false
+
+examples:
+ - |
+ wifi@110180000 {
+ compatible = "ralink,rt2880-wifi";
+ reg = <0x10180000 0x40000>;
+ clocks = <&sysc 16>;
+ interrupt-parent = <&cpuintc>;
+ interrupts = <6>;
+ };
--
2.50.0On 10/07/2025 22:08, Rosen Penev wrote: > Add device-tree bindings for the RT2800 SOC wifi device found in older > Ralink/Mediatek devices. > > Signed-off-by: Rosen Penev <rosenp@gmail.com> > --- > .../bindings/net/wireless/ralink,rt2800.yaml | 47 +++++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 47 insertions(+) > create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/wireless/ralink,rt2800.yaml > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/wireless/ralink,rt2800.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/wireless/ralink,rt2800.yaml > new file mode 100644 > index 000000000000..8c13b25bd8b4 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/wireless/ralink,rt2800.yaml Filename should match compatible. You were already changing something here... Best regards, Krzysztof
On Thu, Jul 10, 2025 at 2:40 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org> wrote: > > On 10/07/2025 22:08, Rosen Penev wrote: > > Add device-tree bindings for the RT2800 SOC wifi device found in older > > Ralink/Mediatek devices. > > > > Signed-off-by: Rosen Penev <rosenp@gmail.com> > > --- > > .../bindings/net/wireless/ralink,rt2800.yaml | 47 +++++++++++++++++++ > > 1 file changed, 47 insertions(+) > > create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/wireless/ralink,rt2800.yaml > > > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/wireless/ralink,rt2800.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/wireless/ralink,rt2800.yaml > > new file mode 100644 > > index 000000000000..8c13b25bd8b4 > > --- /dev/null > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/wireless/ralink,rt2800.yaml > > Filename should match compatible. You were already changing something > here... hrm? that makes no sense. Various drivers have multiple compatible lines. > > Best regards, > Krzysztof
On Thu, Jul 10, 2025 at 03:40:30PM -0700, Rosen Penev wrote: > On Thu, Jul 10, 2025 at 2:40 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org> wrote: > > > > On 10/07/2025 22:08, Rosen Penev wrote: > > > Add device-tree bindings for the RT2800 SOC wifi device found in older > > > Ralink/Mediatek devices. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Rosen Penev <rosenp@gmail.com> > > > --- > > > .../bindings/net/wireless/ralink,rt2800.yaml | 47 +++++++++++++++++++ > > > 1 file changed, 47 insertions(+) > > > create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/wireless/ralink,rt2800.yaml > > > > > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/wireless/ralink,rt2800.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/wireless/ralink,rt2800.yaml > > > new file mode 100644 > > > index 000000000000..8c13b25bd8b4 > > > --- /dev/null > > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/wireless/ralink,rt2800.yaml > > > > Filename should match compatible. You were already changing something > > here... > hrm? that makes no sense. Various drivers have multiple compatible lines. Luckily we do not speak about drivers here. Anyway, follow standard review practices, you don't get special rules. Best regards, Krzysztof
Hi Krzysztof, On Fri, Jul 11, 2025 at 09:48:49AM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On Thu, Jul 10, 2025 at 03:40:30PM -0700, Rosen Penev wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 10, 2025 at 2:40 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org> wrote: > > > > > > On 10/07/2025 22:08, Rosen Penev wrote: > > > > Add device-tree bindings for the RT2800 SOC wifi device found in older > > > > Ralink/Mediatek devices. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Rosen Penev <rosenp@gmail.com> > > > > --- > > > > .../bindings/net/wireless/ralink,rt2800.yaml | 47 +++++++++++++++++++ > > > > 1 file changed, 47 insertions(+) > > > > create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/wireless/ralink,rt2800.yaml > > > > > > > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/wireless/ralink,rt2800.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/wireless/ralink,rt2800.yaml > > > > new file mode 100644 > > > > index 000000000000..8c13b25bd8b4 > > > > --- /dev/null > > > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/wireless/ralink,rt2800.yaml > > > > > > Filename should match compatible. You were already changing something > > > here... > > hrm? that makes no sense. Various drivers have multiple compatible lines. > > Luckily we do not speak about drivers here. Anyway, follow standard > review practices, you don't get special rules. Could you please elaborate what you mean ? I greped through Documentation/devicetree/bindings/*/*.yaml and plenty of "compatible:" items do not match the filename. So hard to tell what rule you are referencing, as it seems it's not really applied. Regards Stanislaw
On 12/07/2025 12:40, Stanislaw Gruszka wrote: > Hi Krzysztof, > > On Fri, Jul 11, 2025 at 09:48:49AM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >> On Thu, Jul 10, 2025 at 03:40:30PM -0700, Rosen Penev wrote: >>> On Thu, Jul 10, 2025 at 2:40 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org> wrote: >>>> >>>> On 10/07/2025 22:08, Rosen Penev wrote: >>>>> Add device-tree bindings for the RT2800 SOC wifi device found in older >>>>> Ralink/Mediatek devices. >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Rosen Penev <rosenp@gmail.com> >>>>> --- >>>>> .../bindings/net/wireless/ralink,rt2800.yaml | 47 +++++++++++++++++++ >>>>> 1 file changed, 47 insertions(+) >>>>> create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/wireless/ralink,rt2800.yaml >>>>> >>>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/wireless/ralink,rt2800.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/wireless/ralink,rt2800.yaml >>>>> new file mode 100644 >>>>> index 000000000000..8c13b25bd8b4 >>>>> --- /dev/null >>>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/wireless/ralink,rt2800.yaml >>>> >>>> Filename should match compatible. You were already changing something >>>> here... >>> hrm? that makes no sense. Various drivers have multiple compatible lines. >> >> Luckily we do not speak about drivers here. Anyway, follow standard >> review practices, you don't get special rules. > > Could you please elaborate what you mean ? Rosen replied in abrasive way, so I am not going to dig this. > > I greped through Documentation/devicetree/bindings/*/*.yaml and plenty I assume you refer to last 2 years bindings, not something older, right? It is really poor argument to find old files and use them as example "they did like that". > of "compatible:" items do not match the filename. So hard to tell I did not ask for compatible to match filename. > what rule you are referencing, as it seems it's not really applied. Check reviews on the lists. It is pretty standard review. Everyone gets it for this case here - single device, single compatible. Best regards, Krzysztof
On 12/07/2025 18:53, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 12/07/2025 12:40, Stanislaw Gruszka wrote: >> Hi Krzysztof, >> >> On Fri, Jul 11, 2025 at 09:48:49AM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>> On Thu, Jul 10, 2025 at 03:40:30PM -0700, Rosen Penev wrote: >>>> On Thu, Jul 10, 2025 at 2:40 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> On 10/07/2025 22:08, Rosen Penev wrote: >>>>>> Add device-tree bindings for the RT2800 SOC wifi device found in older >>>>>> Ralink/Mediatek devices. >>>>>> >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Rosen Penev <rosenp@gmail.com> >>>>>> --- >>>>>> .../bindings/net/wireless/ralink,rt2800.yaml | 47 +++++++++++++++++++ >>>>>> 1 file changed, 47 insertions(+) >>>>>> create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/wireless/ralink,rt2800.yaml >>>>>> >>>>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/wireless/ralink,rt2800.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/wireless/ralink,rt2800.yaml >>>>>> new file mode 100644 >>>>>> index 000000000000..8c13b25bd8b4 >>>>>> --- /dev/null >>>>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/wireless/ralink,rt2800.yaml >>>>> >>>>> Filename should match compatible. You were already changing something >>>>> here... >>>> hrm? that makes no sense. Various drivers have multiple compatible lines. >>> >>> Luckily we do not speak about drivers here. Anyway, follow standard >>> review practices, you don't get special rules. >> >> Could you please elaborate what you mean ? > > Rosen replied in abrasive way, so I am not going to dig this. > >> >> I greped through Documentation/devicetree/bindings/*/*.yaml and plenty > > I assume you refer to last 2 years bindings, not something older, right? > It is really poor argument to find old files and use them as example > "they did like that". > >> of "compatible:" items do not match the filename. So hard to tell > > I did not ask for compatible to match filename. > >> what rule you are referencing, as it seems it's not really applied. > Check reviews on the lists. It is pretty standard review. Everyone gets > it for this case here - single device, single compatible. BTW, it is not hiding on the lists: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-devicetree/?q=f%3Aherring+filename https://lore.kernel.org/linux-devicetree/?q=f%3Akozlowski+filename Best regards, Krzysztof
Hi Krzysztof and Rob, On Sun, Jul 13, 2025 at 2:59 AM Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org> wrote: > > On 12/07/2025 18:53, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > > On 12/07/2025 12:40, Stanislaw Gruszka wrote: > >> Hi Krzysztof, > >> > >> On Fri, Jul 11, 2025 at 09:48:49AM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > >>> On Thu, Jul 10, 2025 at 03:40:30PM -0700, Rosen Penev wrote: > >>>> On Thu, Jul 10, 2025 at 2:40 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> On 10/07/2025 22:08, Rosen Penev wrote: > >>>>>> Add device-tree bindings for the RT2800 SOC wifi device found in older > >>>>>> Ralink/Mediatek devices. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Rosen Penev <rosenp@gmail.com> > >>>>>> --- > >>>>>> .../bindings/net/wireless/ralink,rt2800.yaml | 47 +++++++++++++++++++ > >>>>>> 1 file changed, 47 insertions(+) > >>>>>> create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/wireless/ralink,rt2800.yaml > >>>>>> > >>>>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/wireless/ralink,rt2800.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/wireless/ralink,rt2800.yaml > >>>>>> new file mode 100644 > >>>>>> index 000000000000..8c13b25bd8b4 > >>>>>> --- /dev/null > >>>>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/wireless/ralink,rt2800.yaml > >>>>> > >>>>> Filename should match compatible. You were already changing something > >>>>> here... > >>>> hrm? that makes no sense. Various drivers have multiple compatible lines. > >>> > >>> Luckily we do not speak about drivers here. Anyway, follow standard > >>> review practices, you don't get special rules. > >> > >> Could you please elaborate what you mean ? > > > > Rosen replied in abrasive way, so I am not going to dig this. > > > >> > >> I greped through Documentation/devicetree/bindings/*/*.yaml and plenty > > > > I assume you refer to last 2 years bindings, not something older, right? > > It is really poor argument to find old files and use them as example > > "they did like that". > > > >> of "compatible:" items do not match the filename. So hard to tell > > > > I did not ask for compatible to match filename. > > > >> what rule you are referencing, as it seems it's not really applied. > > Check reviews on the lists. It is pretty standard review. Everyone gets > > it for this case here - single device, single compatible. > > BTW, it is not hiding on the lists: > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-devicetree/?q=f%3Aherring+filename > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-devicetree/?q=f%3Akozlowski+filename I just had a quick look through the in-tree documentation on device tree bindings and can't find this rule there. It's good that you and Rob are consistent in applying this rule, but pointing to the mailing list archives instead of the documentation makes it feel like patch submissions in this space are judged by some arbitrary set of undocumented rules. Could you please update the documentation with the current set of requirements so that people who are new to this space have a consistent set of rules they can apply to their work? I understand that Krzysztof doesn't particularly like having discussions around the rules given his usual abrasive manner, so having the full rules documented would be a way to shift these conversations into something a bit more like how Greg applies stable rules: if you get it wrong, you get a link to the documentation, which should clarify most issues without any further discussion. Thanks, -- Julian Calaby Email: julian.calaby@gmail.com Profile: http://www.google.com/profiles/julian.calaby/
On 13/07/2025 01:20, Julian Calaby wrote: > Hi Krzysztof and Rob, > > On Sun, Jul 13, 2025 at 2:59 AM Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org> wrote: >> >> On 12/07/2025 18:53, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>> On 12/07/2025 12:40, Stanislaw Gruszka wrote: >>>> Hi Krzysztof, >>>> >>>> On Fri, Jul 11, 2025 at 09:48:49AM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>>>> On Thu, Jul 10, 2025 at 03:40:30PM -0700, Rosen Penev wrote: >>>>>> On Thu, Jul 10, 2025 at 2:40 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 10/07/2025 22:08, Rosen Penev wrote: >>>>>>>> Add device-tree bindings for the RT2800 SOC wifi device found in older >>>>>>>> Ralink/Mediatek devices. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Rosen Penev <rosenp@gmail.com> >>>>>>>> --- >>>>>>>> .../bindings/net/wireless/ralink,rt2800.yaml | 47 +++++++++++++++++++ >>>>>>>> 1 file changed, 47 insertions(+) >>>>>>>> create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/wireless/ralink,rt2800.yaml >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/wireless/ralink,rt2800.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/wireless/ralink,rt2800.yaml >>>>>>>> new file mode 100644 >>>>>>>> index 000000000000..8c13b25bd8b4 >>>>>>>> --- /dev/null >>>>>>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/wireless/ralink,rt2800.yaml >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Filename should match compatible. You were already changing something >>>>>>> here... >>>>>> hrm? that makes no sense. Various drivers have multiple compatible lines. >>>>> >>>>> Luckily we do not speak about drivers here. Anyway, follow standard >>>>> review practices, you don't get special rules. >>>> >>>> Could you please elaborate what you mean ? >>> >>> Rosen replied in abrasive way, so I am not going to dig this. >>> >>>> >>>> I greped through Documentation/devicetree/bindings/*/*.yaml and plenty >>> >>> I assume you refer to last 2 years bindings, not something older, right? >>> It is really poor argument to find old files and use them as example >>> "they did like that". >>> >>>> of "compatible:" items do not match the filename. So hard to tell >>> >>> I did not ask for compatible to match filename. >>> >>>> what rule you are referencing, as it seems it's not really applied. >>> Check reviews on the lists. It is pretty standard review. Everyone gets >>> it for this case here - single device, single compatible. >> >> BTW, it is not hiding on the lists: >> >> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-devicetree/?q=f%3Aherring+filename >> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-devicetree/?q=f%3Akozlowski+filename > > I just had a quick look through the in-tree documentation on device > tree bindings and can't find this rule there. > > It's good that you and Rob are consistent in applying this rule, but > pointing to the mailing list archives instead of the documentation > makes it feel like patch submissions in this space are judged by some > arbitrary set of undocumented rules. > > Could you please update the documentation with the current set of > requirements so that people who are new to this space have a > consistent set of rules they can apply to their work? I agree. I already grew the docs some time ago, then few days ago and I have in plan to keep growing it more. I'll document also this one, thanks for the pointer. Regardless of the missing docs, argument "I found some old code like that" is almost never correct. And even if you find newest code like that, you still need to consider all reviews and discussions on the lists leading to such or some other decision. Including the most trivial reason: we often don't care about minor details. Filename is such minor detail, unused label in DTS example is another, even more frequent one (we complain about it but also accept many patches with it). Do I question every reviewer's comments like that on my patches, which I send a lot? That I found some old code which was different than what reviewer asked me? No. Best regards, Krzysztof
© 2016 - 2025 Red Hat, Inc.