linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 1/7] dt-bindings: power: Constrain properties for JH7110 PMU

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <d59439c1-bce1-b4a1-0e05-77afc4fc2ebb@linaro.org>
Date:   Wed, 12 Apr 2023 13:29:57 +0200
From:   Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
To:     Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@...rochip.com>,
        Changhuang Liang <changhuang.liang@...rfivetech.com>
Cc:     Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
        Emil Renner Berthing <kernel@...il.dk>,
        Conor Dooley <conor@...nel.org>,
        Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
        Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>,
        Albert Ou <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>,
        Walker Chen <walker.chen@...rfivetech.com>,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/7] dt-bindings: power: Constrain properties for
 JH7110 PMU

On 12/04/2023 11:42, Conor Dooley wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 12, 2023 at 04:51:16PM +0800, Changhuang Liang wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 2023/4/12 16:35, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>> On 11/04/2023 08:47, Changhuang Liang wrote:
>>>> When use "starfive,jh7110-pmu-dphy" compatible, do not need the reg and
>>>> interrupts properties.
>> [...]
>>>>  
>>>>  description: |
>>>>    StarFive JH7110 SoC includes support for multiple power domains which can be
>>>> @@ -17,6 +18,7 @@ properties:
>>>>    compatible:
>>>>      enum:
>>>>        - starfive,jh7110-pmu
>>>> +      - starfive,jh7110-pmu-dphy
>>>
>>> You do here much more than commit msg says.
>>>
>>> Isn'y DPHY a phy? Why is it in power?
>>>
>>
>> OK, I will add more description. This is a power framework used to turn on/off 
>> DPHY. So it in power, not a phy.
> 
> Perhaps tie it less to its role w/ the phy, and more to do with its
> location, say "jh7110-aon-pmu"?
> There's already "aon"/"sys"/"stg" stuff used in clock-controller and
> syscon compatibles etc.
> 
> Krzysztof, what do you think of that? (if you remember the whole
> discussion we previously had about using those identifiers a few weeks
> ago).

Depends whether this is the same case or not. AFAIR, for AON/SYS/STG
these were blocks with few features, not only clock controller.

This sounds like just phy. Powering on/off phy is still a job of phy
controller... unless it is a power domain controller.
Best regards,
Krzysztof