From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from relay1-d.mail.gandi.net (relay1-d.mail.gandi.net [217.70.183.193]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 98C09524C0; Mon, 19 Feb 2024 20:19:25 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=217.70.183.193 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1708373968; cv=none; b=CyM55jKjV2lXGT+7+GokUtGaJaEi5d37dhIpVN+KJey9rSC+6DNs3nA1QaFAeutMSICkfN/TCIXE2BhbG+4Y2Ub1l2Rtj+hP0xiHW20WCIVbCRDz/txGISFhvjmzW1VrFKEbS/QptRludGnLLdTWa61nj8fUhkPwCAXI+MhyH98= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1708373968; c=relaxed/simple; bh=EwTBXOokFY4P9ANdyfQvACUoGgEpku28/zv8Debf6KQ=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=ERRnDhHYB+4R1fXE9uNMbj/UmuOznIHYbRcwocpzAC9t5M8/FX4lZs2G6exC/cPsD06FxP7ZIG2k0gEzaYKK0aQsjdt3zsebJ+YeDGDfyisIwFOelLKWtKI8ekjzjZaTLx4k5cJ/lYb6jRHe5mUAsRimiSNQCUNG/IPOWiqUXQg= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=bootlin.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=bootlin.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=bootlin.com header.i=@bootlin.com header.b=ZJJBiWbb; arc=none smtp.client-ip=217.70.183.193 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=bootlin.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=bootlin.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=bootlin.com header.i=@bootlin.com header.b="ZJJBiWbb" Received: by mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1FC0F240003; Mon, 19 Feb 2024 20:19:17 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=bootlin.com; s=gm1; t=1708373957; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=/eFa1OZ6RfBH4efn1I84fs1ja49iC4gp/bJRJKYHyLY=; b=ZJJBiWbbQlaBB2D6VpMjxy7mi1VJFKuuQHHbAVy2+IbVDdQ6zzJNgzwpTrdZy3I7Z5Xl81 lmZ/fVm4w9xg7xsGvRp47527tcWFUhfrz6mGGNeQ2uzs4msTJbniB8ZKQq2pYnxwH/SsdX YRVfyuatTfzV0WAY6i2dJyzxDEdEuCm41W+B9LzOpSscxlaSNYOphuOgHlO1O+bcljUUxz Qem3xafhQyRKvcG+A57yYeIjrYlz8WMWqMjfJY7Oa3blsQV6klPHBz1RRKl0XokY2ILVQh FD3Sc4jN8ItbrLxZXE5SKqG+N5MFkgsNQwDZ7xEAfIttA/j6f33s5t1RtpgUMA== Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2024 21:19:16 +0100 From: Alexandre Belloni To: Michal Simek Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, monstr@monstr.eu, michal.simek@xilinx.com, git@xilinx.com, Conor Dooley , Krzysztof Kozlowski , Rob Herring , "open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS" , "moderated list:ARM/ZYNQ ARCHITECTURE" , "open list:REAL TIME CLOCK (RTC) SUBSYSTEM" Subject: Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: rtc: zynqmp: Describe power-domains property Message-ID: <202402192019160b9c4120@mail.local> References: <94726c90ff519185767475f672d70311472ea925.1708073513.git.michal.simek@amd.com> <5a81f16b-8ece-4263-b424-4dd6cd6e386f@linaro.org> <96c0f613-7c53-4189-bfc8-7d572b308b9f@amd.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: devicetree@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <96c0f613-7c53-4189-bfc8-7d572b308b9f@amd.com> X-GND-Sasl: alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com On 19/02/2024 14:11:50+0100, Michal Simek wrote: > > > On 2/17/24 09:26, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > > On 16/02/2024 10:42, Michal Simek wrote: > > > > > > > > > On 2/16/24 10:19, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > > > > On 16/02/2024 09:51, Michal Simek wrote: > > > > > RTC has its own power domain on Xilinx Versal SOC that's why describe it as > > > > > optional property. > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Michal Simek > > > > > --- > > > > > > > > > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/xlnx,zynqmp-rtc.yaml | 3 +++ > > > > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) > > > > > > > > > > > > > But Versal is not described in this binding, is it? I see only one > > > > compatible. > > > > > > It is the same IP only as is on zynqmp with own power rail. > > > > Then you should have separate compatible, because they are not > > identical. It would also allow you to narrow the domains to versal and > > also require it (on versal). > > I can double check with HW guys but I am quite sure IP itself is exactly the > same. What it is different is that there is own power domain to it (not > shared one as is in zynqmp case). > > Also Linux is non secure sw and if secure firmware won't allow to change > setting of it it can't be required. I am just saying that Linux doesn't need > to be owner of any power domain that's why it shouldn't be required > property. I guess because the integration is different, you still need a differente compatible so you can forbid the property on non-Versal. > > Thanks, > Michal -- Alexandre Belloni, co-owner and COO, Bootlin Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering https://bootlin.com