[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <2f39acd2-e378-47cf-b852-bee1a38108c5@kernel.org>
Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2025 09:59:40 +0100
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
To: Wilson Ding <dingwei@...vell.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, "robh@...nel.org" <robh@...nel.org>
Cc: "andrew@...n.ch" <andrew@...n.ch>,
"gregory.clement@...tlin.com" <gregory.clement@...tlin.com>,
"sebastian.hesselbarth@...il.com" <sebastian.hesselbarth@...il.com>,
"krzk+dt@...nel.org" <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
"conor+dt@...nel.org" <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
"p.zabel@...gutronix.de" <p.zabel@...gutronix.de>,
Sanghoon Lee <salee@...vell.com>, Geethasowjanya Akula <gakula@...vell.com>
Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] arm64: dts: marvell: cp11x: Add
reset controller node
On 06/03/2025 18:42, Wilson Ding wrote:
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
>> Sent: Wednesday, March 5, 2025 11:29 PM
>> To: Wilson Ding <dingwei@...vell.com>; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org;
>> devicetree@...r.kernel.org; linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org;
>> robh@...nel.org
>> Cc: andrew@...n.ch; gregory.clement@...tlin.com;
>> sebastian.hesselbarth@...il.com; krzk+dt@...nel.org; conor+dt@...nel.org;
>> p.zabel@...gutronix.de; Sanghoon Lee <salee@...vell.com>;
>> Geethasowjanya Akula <gakula@...vell.com>
>> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] arm64: dts: marvell: cp11x: Add reset
>> controller node
>>
>> On 04/03/2025 20:08, Wilson Ding wrote:
>>>
>>> I did consider shrinking the syscon's register address range to make
>>> the reset-controller node to be independent from the syscon node.
>>> However, I found the syscon node is also referred by some devices for
>>> miscellaneous configurations . The reset configuration register
>>> happens to be located in between these registers and clock/GPIO
>>> registers.
>>>
>>>> drop offset in your patch or unify everything into 'reg'.
>>>>
>>>
>>> This is exactly what I proposed in v3 patch. Do I misunderstand you?
>>>
>>> CP11X_LABEL(swrst): reset-controller@268 {
>>> compatible = "marvell,armada8k-reset";
>>> reg = <0x268 0x4>;
>>> #reset-cells = <1>;
>>> };
>>
>> I don't see the other device being fixed here. How did you unify them?
>
> This patch series is about the proposal of Armada8K's reset controller
> dt-binding. The dt-bindings issues of clock/GPIO controllers have been
> there for years. Having to say, it is not just a simple patch to fix it. It
I understand, you just want to throw your patch here over the wall. It's
reasonable, I feel it. Just like previous cases for this binding -
everyone wanted one subnode at a time, ignoring bigger picture, each
time making it franken-node or franken-binding.
Please listen to Greg's talk from years ago about upstreaming. "I don't
want your code":
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fMeH7wqOwXA
Best regards,
Krzysztof
Powered by blists - more mailing lists