On Wed, Aug 24, 2022 at 08:33:54PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Aug 2022 at 16:51, Jean-Philippe Brucker
> <jean-phili...@linaro.org> wrote:
> >
> > dt-validate warns that an implementation compatible with arm,psci-1.0
> > shouldn't have arm,psci in their compatible string.
> >
> > psci: compatible: 'oneOf' conditional failed, one must be fixed:
> > ['arm,psci-1.0', 'arm,psci-0.2', 'arm,psci'] is too long
> > From schema: linux/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/psci.yaml
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-phili...@linaro.org>
> > ---
> > hw/arm/boot.c | 2 +-
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/hw/arm/boot.c b/hw/arm/boot.c
> > index ada2717f76..527918227e 100644
> > --- a/hw/arm/boot.c
> > +++ b/hw/arm/boot.c
> > @@ -493,7 +493,7 @@ static void fdt_add_psci_node(void *fdt)
> > const char comp[] = "arm,psci-0.2\0arm,psci";
> > qemu_fdt_setprop(fdt, "/psci", "compatible", comp,
> > sizeof(comp));
> > } else {
> > - const char comp[] = "arm,psci-1.0\0arm,psci-0.2\0arm,psci";
> > + const char comp[] = "arm,psci-1.0\0arm,psci-0.2";
> > qemu_fdt_setprop(fdt, "/psci", "compatible", comp,
> > sizeof(comp));
> > }
>
> This doesn't look right.
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/psci.yaml says
> "arm,psci-1.0" means "complies to PSCI 1.0",
> "arm,psci-0.2" means "complies to PSCI 0.2",
> and "arm,psci" means "complies to pre-0.2 PSCI"
>
> If you want to drop "arm,psci" then you should be arguing why
> we're not compliant with pre-0.2 PSCI. Maybe we aren't and we
> shouldn't be advertising it, but you need more rationale than
> "dt-validate complained".
Yes I agree, and that's my mistake. Rob already relaxed the bindings
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20220803201639.2552581-1-r...@kernel.org/
but that's queued for v6.1 and I was validating against mainline.
I'll drop the patch
Thanks,
Jean
