[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20220822135050.o4a4bw3dqkmhtjgb@pali>
Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2022 15:50:50 +0200
From: Pali Rohár <pali@...nel.org>
To: Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Marek Behún <kabel@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] dt-bindings: reset: syscon-reboot: Add priority
property
On Monday 22 August 2022 07:47:28 Rob Herring wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 20, 2022 at 12:29:23PM +0200, Pali Rohár wrote:
> > This new optional priority property allows to specify custom priority level
> > of reset device. Default level was always 192.
>
> Why do we need/want this? What problem does it solve?
See patch 3/3.
> > Signed-off-by: Pali Rohár <pali@...nel.org>
> > ---
> > .../devicetree/bindings/power/reset/syscon-reboot.yaml | 4 ++++
> > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/reset/syscon-reboot.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/reset/syscon-reboot.yaml
> > index da2509724812..d905133aab27 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/reset/syscon-reboot.yaml
> > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/reset/syscon-reboot.yaml
> > @@ -42,6 +42,10 @@ properties:
> > $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/uint32
> > description: The reset value written to the reboot register (32 bit access).
> >
> > + priority:
>
> A bit too generic for the name.
>
> > + $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/sint32
> > + description: Priority level of this syscon reset device. Default 192.
>
> default: 192
>
>
> Though I'm not really sure about the whole concept of this in DT. Where
> does 192 come from?
Implicitly from the current implementation and how it is used.
> Presumably if we have more than 1 reset device, then
> 'priority' is needed in multiple places. So you need a common schema
> defining the property (as property types should be defined exactly
> once) which this schema can reference.
>
> Rob
Sorry, I do not understand.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists