On Mon, Oct 4, 2021 at 4:32 AM Krzysztof Kozlowski
<krzysztof.kozlow...@canonical.com> wrote:
>
> On 01/10/2021 18:17, Li Yang wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 1, 2021 at 5:01 AM Krzysztof Kozlowski
> > <krzysztof.kozlow...@canonical.com> wrote:
> >>
>
> (...)
>
> >>> +
> >>> + interrupts:
> >>> + minItems: 1
> >>> + maxItems: 2
> >>> + description: |
> >>> + IFC may have one or two interrupts. If two interrupt specifiers
> >>> are
> >>> + present, the first is the "common" interrupt (CM_EVTER_STAT), and
> >>> the
> >>> + second is the NAND interrupt (NAND_EVTER_STAT). If there is only
> >>> one,
> >>> + that interrupt reports both types of event.
> >>> +
> >>> + little-endian:
> >>> + $ref: '/schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/flag'
> >>
> >> type: boolean
> >
> > It will not have a true or false value, but only present or not. Is
> > the boolean type taking care of this too?
>
> boolean is for a property which does not accept values and true/false
> depends on its presence.
> See:
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/lantiq,vrx200-pcie-phy.yaml
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/thermal/qoriq-thermal.yaml
>From the dtschema/schemas/types.yaml file, flag type is defined as:
flag:
oneOf:
- type: boolean
const: true
- type: 'null'
It looks like more than the boolean type itself. But if the standard
boolean type is actually the same as the flag type we defined.
Shouldn't we remove the custom flag type then?
Regards,
Leo
