[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZW2gWhzMV0FiB9oM@hovoldconsulting.com>
Date: Mon, 4 Dec 2023 10:48:10 +0100
From: Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org>
To: Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
Cc: Johan Hovold <johan+linaro@...nel.org>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
Andy Gross <agross@...nel.org>,
Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: pinctrl: qcom,pmic-mpp: clean up example
On Fri, Dec 01, 2023 at 01:51:06PM -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 10:56 AM Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org> wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 01, 2023 at 08:43:20AM -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
> > > This is fine, but I prefer these MFDs have 1 complete example rather
> > > than piecemeal examples for each child device.
> >
> > Yeah, this is not ideal. The closest thing we've got are the examples
> > in:
> >
> > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/qcom,spmi-pmic.yaml
> >
> > Are you suggesting eventually dropping the examples from the child node
> > bindings and adding (several) complete examples in the parent one?
>
> Yes, but if the child nodes are truly reused across multiple PMICs
> then, it is probably a worthwhile exception. There's not a great deal
> of reuse on most MFDs.
Yes, they are indeed reused by multiple PMICs in this case.
> > I guess there would need to be more than one if you want to cover all
> > the various child nodes with real examples.
>
> We don't want examples to be exhaustive permutations of every
> possibility either.
Not every possible permutation but I guess we'd want coverage of all the
various child nodes still (i.e. the child node examples that would have
been removed).
Johan
Powered by blists - more mailing lists