From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Guenter Roeck Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND V2 1/4] dt-bindings: fsl: scu: add watchdog binding Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2019 14:27:50 -0800 Message-ID: <20190226222750.GA30985@roeck-us.net> References: <1550472539-16590-1-git-send-email-Anson.Huang@nxp.com> <1550472539-16590-2-git-send-email-Anson.Huang@nxp.com> <20190222195217.GA22194@bogus> <96932b3e-87f1-d8f2-95bc-0e9a8d5d45ed@roeck-us.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Rob Herring Cc: Anson Huang , "mark.rutland@arm.com" , "ulf.hansson@linaro.org" , "heiko@sntech.de" , "catalin.marinas@arm.com" , "will.deacon@arm.com" , "bjorn.andersson@linaro.org" , "festevam@gmail.com" , "jagan@amarulasolutions.com" , Andy Gross , dl-linux-imx , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org" , "arnd@arndb.de" , "marc.w.gonzalez@free.fr" , "s.hauer@pengutronix.de" , enric List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 03:34:12PM -0600, Rob Herring wrote: > > > > > > I think Rob suggested that the SCU parent driver should instantiate the > > > watchdog without explicit watchdog node. That would be possible, but it > > > currently uses > > > devm_of_platform_populate() to do the instantiation, and changing that > > > would be a mess. Besides, it does sem to me that your suggested node would > > > describe the hardware, so I am not sure I understand the reasoning. > > It would just be a call to create a platform device instead. How is that a mess? > > It's describing firmware. We have DT for describing h/w we've failed > to make discoverable. We should not repeat that and just describe > firmware in DT. Make the firmware discoverable! Though there are cases > like firmware provided clocks where we still need something in DT, but > this is not one of them. > It requires extra code where an added DT node would accomplish the same. It requires a mix of DT nodes for existing devices plus extra code for newly added devices. To me that looks like a revert to old platform code, which was replaced with DT descriptions over the last several years. But then if that is where things are going, who am I to argue. Guenter