Re: [PATCH RFC 1/8] dt-bindings: iio: frequency: add ad9910

[Conor Dooley <conor@kernel.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1156 bytes --]

On Sun, Feb 22, 2026 at 10:49:35AM +0000, Rodrigo Alencar wrote:
> On 26/02/21 10:43PM, Conor Dooley wrote:
> > On Sat, Feb 21, 2026 at 02:43:02PM -0600, David Lechner wrote:
> > > On 2/20/26 10:46 AM, Rodrigo Alencar via B4 Relay wrote:
> > 
> > > > +dependentSchemas:
> > > > +  resets:
> > > > +    properties:
> > > > +      reset-gpios: false
> > > > +  reset-gpios:
> > > > +    properties:
> > > > +      resets: false
> > > 
> > > This seems too strict. Couldn't we have some resets from a reset
> > > controller and others from gpios?
> > > 
> > > Or maybe the reset bindings are enough and we don't need the gpio
> > > bindings for the same pin?
> > 
> > Actually, I'd be interested in seeing evidence for the resets property
> > ever being used with this device. I think every single reset-controller
> > that's currently documented is an on-chip device for resetting
> > peripherals.
> 
> As mentioned, an FPGA IP as an IIO backend (MMIO platform_device) will
> implement the reset controller interface.

I think you're confusing this with some other patch, I don't see any
mention of FPGA IPs or io-backends here.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 228 bytes --]