[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1408dcd1-9a46-4cb9-8443-5aa51d61ed56@kernel.org>
Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2024 13:06:50 +0100
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
To: Peter Griffin <peter.griffin@...aro.org>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, Alim Akhtar <alim.akhtar@...sung.com>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>, Lee Jones <lee@...nel.org>
Cc: devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
tudor.ambarus@...aro.org, andre.draszik@...aro.org, willmcvicker@...gle.com,
kernel-team@...roid.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] dt-bindings: mfd: syscon: allow two reg regions for
gs101-pmu
On 13/12/2024 17:44, Peter Griffin wrote:
> To avoid dtschema warnings allow google,gs101-pmu to have
> two reg regions.
>
> Signed-off-by: Peter Griffin <peter.griffin@...aro.org>
> ---
> I don't really like this patch, but also didn't want to submit the series
> with a dtschema warning ;-)
>
> Possibly a better solution is when Robs patch
> `mfd: syscon: Allow syscon nodes without a "syscon" compatible` [1]
PMU which spans over two blocks is not a simple syscon. These would be
two syscon devices.
If you request regmap from such syscon, which regmap you get?
I am not sure whether the PMU is really split here. Usually the main PMU
was only one and additional blocks called PMU were somehow specialized
per each IP block.
Maybe you have here two devices, maybe only one. If it is only one, then
it is not a syscon anymore, IMO.
Best regards,
Krzysztof
Powered by blists - more mailing lists